AC 77-01
Technical Report
Aircraft Emissions at Selected Airports 1972-1985
January 1977
Notice
Technical support reports for regulatory action do not necessarily
represent the final EPA decision on regulatory issues. They are intended
to present a technical analysis of an issue and recommendations resulting
from the assumptions and constraints of that analysis. Agency policy
considerations or data received subsequent to the date of release of
this report may alter the recommendations reached. Readers are cautioned
to seek the latest analysis from EPA before using the information
contained herein.
Standards Development and Support Branch
Emission Control Technology Division
Office of Air and Waste Management
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
Abstract
This report presents airport vicinity aircraft emissions data
for HC, CO and NOx at selected commercial and general aviation airports.
The data represents an updating of calculated aircraft emissions for
recent years and estimates of future aircraft emissions. Operations by
individual aircraft models are scrutinized in detail. Breakdowns of
operations by air carriers, air taxis, general aviation and auxiliary ,
power units are included and the emissions from each are summed to
provide estimates of total pollutants dispersed. Despite a general
trend toward more operations, the total emissions at the commercial
airports decrease as a result of a changing fleet mix with more modern
engines and the advent of promulgated and proposed regulatory standards.
With increased operations at general aviation airports, emissions will
continue to increase without the imposition of regulatory standards
because uncontrolled modern engines emit substantially the same pollutants
as older piston engine designs.
Prepared by:
Project Manager,
Aircraft Regulations
Branch Chief, SDSB
/Director, ECTD
Ls
-------
Introduction
This report presents airport vicinity aircraft emissions data
for HC, CO and NOx. The data represents an updating of calculated
aircraft emissions for recent years and estimates of future aircraft
emissions at several selected commercial and general aviation airports.
This report does not provide comparisons with non-aircraft emissions
sources nor establish the significance of the emissions dispersed by
aircraft in the airport vicinity, but rather provides updated data for
follow-on reports that analyze the significance of the aircraft burden
and make suitable comparison with land born sources.
Detailed estimates of the future aircraft emissions burden in the
vicinity of airports are needed to support final rulemaking in the 1983
retrofit program for T2 class engines over 29,000 Ibs. thrust (NPRM, 38
FR 19050; Tuesday, July 17, 1973) and for possible amendment of current
rules for subsonic aircraft (38 FR 19087; Tuesday July 17, 1973).
Previous studies have attempted to develop a satisfactory method-
ology for assessing the aircraft emissions impact and have gathered data
by physical measurement at sites in the vicinity of selected airports.
The methodology studies include the EPA-Argonne National Laboratories
Pollution Impact Methodology Report and the GCA/Technology Division
2
Airport Emission Inventory Methodology Report .
-------
The EPA-Argonne Methodology Report addresses a selected airport
and its environs as an aggregate source of air pollution. The meth-
odology presented integrates the air pollution impact of an airport and
its associated ground support with that of the urban development in its
vicinity. A quantitative basis for decisions related to airport site
selection and the development of surrounding land is provided. The
GCA/Technology Report presents a methodology for performing emission
inventories at airports including submethodologies for municipal,
military and civilian airports. The methodology is directed to ob-
taining emissions data from both aircraft and surface sources at all
airports within a metropolitan region and combining the data to provide
an indication of the airport burden upon the air quality control region
(AQCR).
Both methodology studies include data from actual airports and
environments to illustrate the applicability and limitations of the
methodologies. Conversely, some of the data gathering studies below
include methodologies utilized to obtain and assimilate the data into
meaningful form.
3
A third study, the Northern Research and Engineering Report ,
is limited to the presentation of calculated percentages separately in-
dicating the contribution of aircraft and airport emissions to national
and regional total emissions. The regional impacts are presented for
selected cities and airports therein.
-------
Unfortunately, the predictions of the mathematical models and
methodologies developed above have had certain weaknesses. Such studies
have not adequately taken into account the fleet mix differences between
seemingly similar commercial airports. The fleet mix utilizing a
particular airport is dependent upon the particular airlines servicing
the airport, the airport physical plant (runway length, etc.) and
location. The fleet mix can have a decided effect upon the length of
time before older and dirtier aircraft are phased out to the point where
their effect on overall emissions at the. airport become inconsequential.
-------
Summary of Methodology
The methodology of this report is dependent upon the predominance
of either commercial aviation operations or general aviation operations.
The ten busiest airports in the United States in terms of numbers of
operations fall overwhelmingly into one category or the other with none
evenly divided between commercial aviation and general aviation.
Therefore, the methodology is divided into two parts, i.e., airports
representative of commercial usage and airports representative of
general aviation usage. The methodology is applied to three commercial
airports (John F. Kennedy International, Los Angeles International and
O'Hare International) and to six general aviation airports (Van Nuys,
Tamiami, Phoenix, Fairbanks and San Jose Municipal combined with Reid
Hillview).
Fart I of the Appendix presents the methodology in detail for
the commercial aviation airports and Fart II presents the methodology in
detail for the general aviation airports. Block diagrams presented in
Charts I through IV summarize briefly the computational approach. As is
apparent from the block diagrams the methodology is dependent upon
compiled resources available to EFA.
Chart I depicts the step-by-step procedure for estimating total
aircraft emissions at a commercial airport for 1972. The procedure is
easily adapted to calculations for more recent years as more recent
input information becomes available. Intermediate information such as
-------
f
\
r
\
Categorical Iraakdovn Of
Operation* At Selected .*>
Table 1-1
fv, .
L U"
fv
f
Airport Activity Stetle'tlce Of
Certified lout* Air Carrier*
Total Departurea
^-~--.^_
CA * Ucel- ^~^-~^^ _/pv
Operation* ^ l2 Vs>*y <1
_^^ '
Fleet Mix Official Airline Guide
By Percent
Aircraft Air Taxi Flight* Per Week
Type per Aircraft Type
~~~ --^_
*T ~~^, ,1 K ' M b-
^-^~~
Air Taxi LTO' a For
Selected Airport*
Tabl* I - 6
" ^^"~~~~~. t.
Uperattone ^ v^
r> »i , . , h,
^- -i I'
-^
1
Foreign Flag Aircraft
Operation* Per Month
\
Percent Scheduled' Departurea Foreign Flag Aircraft LTD1* .
For Selected Airport*
Airport Activity Statistic* Of
Certified Route Air Carrlere Table 1 - 2
r-1
" 1
Intraatat* Aircraft'1
LTO'* Per Week
X
. Percent Scheduled Departurea Intreatate Aircraft]
LTO "a Per Tear :
^ «5J ^ L ^.- i ' t^ mj . ^
Airport Activity Statlatlca Of
Certified Boute Air Cerrler* Table 1-3
Supplemental Airline Fleet HI*
Fleet Mix gatloated Supplemental Airline
By Percent Operation* For Selected Alrportai
Table I - *b
Aircraft
Type Table I - Ae
^i ^i ..':..
- ^-|TO Chert 11
S~\
1
'
-
;r
rllne Operetlona
/ >
Air Cerrler LTO'e For ^ - ^ ^ ^ Supplemental Airline Aircraft
Selected Airport* V »« " I l> LTO1* For Selected Alrporte
-st
lable l_- » -< ,,ku x . 4c
Weighted Percent
'.For Seven Kuppli
E Total Oeperturee
nentel Airline*
Chart I, Sheet 1;
-------
General Aviation Fleet Hlx
ettleat** ly Percent Engine
Type At Selected Airport*
Cenau* Of United State*
Civil Aircraft
National Engine Hodal Distribution
Auxiliary Power Unit Bepreaentatlve
Duty Ti»e* In Mlnutaa Per LTO
Auxiliary Power Unit
Evlealoo Factor*
Table I - 1J.
Taxi-Idle Tlii** At
Selected CoBnerclal
Airport*
Table 1-9 :
Taxi-Idle blaaloo
Factora For HC. to, NOx
ril«hc Made hlealon
factor* For HC. CO, HOz
Fleet Hlx Percent By Engine Model
Engine LTO'a For General Aviation
At Selected CoMMrclel Airport*
Table 1-7
Auxiliary Power Unit Uae (LTO'a)
At Selected CoBnerclel Airport* ;
Table I.- 8
Auxiliary Fewer Unit Eedaalon*
At Selected ConaMrclal Airport*
Table* I - 2J, 1 - 24, I - 23
Ceoaral Aviation Ealeelona For
Selected Coeowrclal Airport*
Table* I - 20. I - 21. I - 22
Coeipuced Engine B«l**lon Factor*
At Selected Coe»*rclal Airport*
Table* I - 10, I - 11. 1-12
Air Carrier And Air Taxi
EulMlon* For Selected
Conerclal Airport*
Table* I - U through I - 19
Batloated' Total Aircraft EolMlon*
At Selected Coawrcl*! Airport*
In Ton* Per Tear
Table 1
Eatlaated Totel Aircraft
Enlaalon*' At Selected
Comerclel Airport*
Table. I - 59. I - 60. I - 61
Airport Land Arc*
Ton* f*t Day
Per Square
Mile
Chart I, Sheet II
-------
Operation* Forecaat* For
Th* Selected Airport*
GA 6 Local
Operation*
General Aviation
Fleet Mix Predictions
Air Taxi
Fleet Ml* Prediction*
Air Carrier LTD'* For
Selected Comerclal Airport*
Table* I - 30. I -.31, 1-32
Fercent Forecaet Of Air Carrier
Operatlona tj Equipment Type
Ten Major
Groups
Computed Engine Emission Factor*
At Selected Comerclal Airport*
Ratio*
Within Ten
Table* I - 10, 1 - 11. I - 12
Estimated Air Taxi LTD'a For
Selected Commercial Airport*
Teble* I - 3J, I - 36. I - }7
Estimated Auxiliary Power Unit Uae
'(LTO'a) At Selected Conerclal
Airport*
Auxiliary Power Unit
tepreeeatetlve Duty Tlmee
Estimated Engine LTO'e For General
Aviation At Selected Come re la 1
Airport*
Table* I - 38, I - 39,
Table* 1-33, 1-34
Auxiliary Power Unit
Emission Factor*
Estimated Auxiliary Power Unit
Emissions At Selected
Conmerclal Airports
Estimated General Aviation
Emissions At Selected
Commercial Airport*
Table* I - 51, I - 34. I - J?
Estimated Total Aircraft
Emissions At Selected
Commercial Airports
Estimated Air Carrier And
Air Taxi Emissions At
Selected Commercial Airporta
Table* 1-41 through 1-49
I - 50. I - 53. I - 56
Tablca I - 19, I - 60. I - 61
Estimated Total Aircraft
[missions At Selected
Coeaarclal Airport*
la Tone Fer Tear
Table* 2. 3. 4
Chart II
-------
numbers of landing and take-off cycles (LTOs) for a specific aircraft
type at a specific airport are easily accessible. The procedure of
Chart I is also applicable to estimating emissions at airports that have
substantial general aviation operations or are evenly divided between
commercial and general aviation with the limitation that the estimates
of the general aviation fleet mix at the particular airport selected
must be reasonably accurate.
Chart II depicts the procedure for estimating total future air
craft emissions at a commercial airport. The procedure is dependent
upon the analysis of current trends in aircraft production and design
and, expectations of future commercial aircraft usage. Predictions of
future air carrier usage at the twenty-five busiest commercial aviation
airports in the Untied States are available, however, predictions of air
taxi and general aviation operations at commercial airports are either
unavailable or conflicting. It is commonly assumed that general avi-
ation operations will become negligible or eliminated at the nation's
g
busiest commercial airports yet at least one FAA report implies a
substantial increase at John F. Kennedy International in the 1980's. It
is also expected that air taxi usage will increase, however, the
increasing passenger load may be taken up by higher load factors and
larger used aircraft purchased from the certified route air carriers
rather than by new replacement aircraft similar to the current fleet
aircraft. There is also the increasing use of helicopters for air taxi
purposes.
-------
In utilizing the procedure of Chart II to estimate future emissions
at a selected commercial airport, the airport must be analyzed in
accordance with the procedure of Chart I for a recent year at least to
the point where LTOs per aircraft type for air carriers, air taxis,
general aviation and auxiliary power units are known. Note that this
procedure includes auxiliary power unit usage as a time period per LTO.
Estimates for 1972, 1975, 1980 and 1985 are included in this report for
the three commercial airports above.
Chart III depicts the procedure for estimating aircraft emissions
at a predominately general aviation airport in 1974. The procedure
assumes that commercial aviation and military operations are negligible
as well as non-piston engine air taxi and general aviation. The procedure
assumes the breakdown of operations by aircraft type for a selected
airport coincides with the breakdown of active general aviation aircraft
in the surrounding county. On this basis, for the general aviation
airports studied, the deletion of non-piston engine air taxi and general
aviation aircraft is deemed reasonable. Where inclusion is required the
procedure of Chart I may be applied. Piston powered air taxi operations
can be included as part of the general aviation operations when aircraft
type information is available.
The LTOs are presented in terms of number of engines and model.
Emissions data are unavailable for many of the piston engine models. In
these cases an engine of similar horsepower for which data is available
is substituted.
-------
Total Upuratlona For
Selected CA Airportl
Table II - 2
Percent Active CA Aircraft By
tr.xlo.-- Type And Number For
Selected CA Airports
Table H - 3
fs-
Number Of CA Aircraft LTO't
By Engine Type And Kuaber
For Selected CA Airports
Table II - 4
X Aircraft
Type By Engine Type
At Airport
National Engine Distribution:
Single Platon Engine Aircraft
Tattle II - 6
National Engine Distribution:
Tula Platon Engine Aircraft
Table II - 7
To
Chart
IV
<1
LTO'i Per Engine Type Per Airport
Engine Enlsslon Factor* For
Selected Pluton Englneu In
Pounde Per LTD
Table II - S
Total BaUsiona From CA
Aircraft At Selected Alrporta
In Tona Per Tear
Table II - 8; Table 5
CHART III
-------
Chart IV depicts the procedure for estimating total future aircraft
emissions at a general aviation airport. The procedure is dependent
upon analysis of current trends in business and executive flying and in
pleasure flying. Sudden changes in the general aviation fleet mix are
highly unlikely because light planes for personal and business use have
20 year useful lives. Trends in fleet mix therefore are long term. The
total number of operations at a selected airport to be expected in the
future is the more important factor. The procedure requires an initial
analysis in accordance with Chart III for a recent year at least to the
point where LTOs per engine model for the selected airport are available.
Estimates of total HC, CO and NOx for the years 1974, 1980 and 1985 are
included in this report for the six general aviation airports above.
The most important data sources for the procedures shown in
Charts I-IV are supplied by the Department of Transportation, the
aircraft engine manufacturers and the publishers of airline guides. The
9
Airport Activity Statistics of Certified Route Air Carriers , published
yearly, and the Official Airline Guide , published twice monthly furnish
departures or arrivals in terms of aircraft type or model for scheduled
airlines. The FAA Air Traffic Activity , published yearly, provides a
breakdown of operations at specific airports into air carrier, air taxi,
Q
general aviation and military. The FAA-Terminal Area Forecast , published
in September 1974 presents estimates of total operations through 1986
broken down for air carrier and air taxi with the balance considered
12
general aviation and military. The FAA Equipment Forecast provides
-------
rradUtad Operation* tor
Selected CA Airport*
Table* II - 9, II - 10
rndlcted Farceot Active CA
Aircraft By Engine Type And
\aber for Selected CA Airport*
Table* II - 11. II - It
National Engine Dlctrlbutlont
rutoo CnflM Aircraft
T«bl« II - *
Hatlooal Engina Olatributlool
rutaa Bifln* Aircraft
Tab la 11-7
b«laa hlaaloo Factor* For
Salactad f la too Io|lM> lo
tut LTD
T*»la II - S
Predicted Nmbar Of CA Aircraft
LTO'a By Engine Type And Nuobar
tot Selected CA Airport*
Table* l\ -13, II - 1*
X Aircraft
typ* ly Inglna Typ»
At Airport
LTD'* f*t Bngloa Typa Far Airport
Eatlautad Total EalMlon* Froa
CA Aircraft At Selected Airport*
In Tan* Far Tear
Table* 6*7
-4
^2000
« '
CHART IV
-------
percentage breakdown of the future operations for ten principal aircraft
types at twenty-five commercial airports. The FAA Census of U.S. Civil
13
Aircraft provides breakdowns of aircraft by number of engines and type
for each county and by manufacturer and number active nationwide. Most
emissions factor data was provided to EPA directly by engine manufacturers.
The methodology of this report does not provide breakdowns of
pollutants dispersed as a function of time of day or location within or
without the selected airport environs but rather provides estimates of
yearly total pollutant dispersed and breakdowns of the pollutant con-
tribution of specific aircraft models or engine models at the selected
airports. Thus, the procedure can only be used to assess the effect of
alternative regulatory actions on the total emissions by class of
aircraft at selected airports.
-------
Discussion of Calculated Results
for Selected Airports
Tables 1 through 4 summarize calculated estimates of the three pollutants
HC, CO, and NOx dispersed from aircraft at the three predominately
commercial aviation airports selected for study, namely John F. Kennedy
International (JFK), Los Angeles International (LAX) and O'Hare International
(ORD). 1972 constitutes a baseline summation of pollutants dispersed as
a result of aircraft activity.
It is immediately apparent from Tables 1 through 4 that the contribution
by air carrier (AC) operations constitutes the overwhelming bulk of the
pollutants dispersed. Virtually all AC operations are performed by
aircraft with engines in the T2, T3, and T4 classes. The exceptions are
principally Lockheed Electras and Hercules turboprops. The Electras are
expected to be phased out before 1980 by obsolescence.
Aside from helicopters, the air taxi (AT) fleets are mostly small jet
and turboprop aircraft with engines in the Tl and P2 classes. The
general aviation (GA) fleets operating from commercial airports are also
mostly small jet and turboprop aircraft because of the relatively high
landing speeds required at the busiest commercial airports.
The decrease in total pollutants from 1972 to 1975 is generally at-
tributable to a combination of decreased aircraft operations and the
changing fleet mix of air carriers. The further substantial decreases
-------
Table 1
Estimated Total Aircraft
AC
*(T2. T3. T4)
AT
(Tl, P2)
GA
(Tl, P2, PI)
APU
JFK
HC
10,559
99.351
18
0.17Z
41
0.39Z
10
0.09Z
CO
15,117
96.26Z
52
0.33Z
207
1.32Z
329
2.09Z
NOx
2,843
91.9Z
3
0.08Z
10
0.32Z
238
7.7Z
Emissions at
LAX
HC
7,396
97.39Z
33
0.43Z
157
2.07Z
9
0.1 IX
Selected
CO
11,564
92.18Z
47
0.37Z
635
5.06Z
300
2.39Z
Commercial Airports for 1972 in T/yr
NO*
2,969
90.84Z
7
0.2Z
54
1.63Z
240
7.33Z
ORD
HC
8,699
99.59Z
69
0.78Z
45
0.51Z
11
0.12Z
CO
15,082
94.09Z
91
0.56Z
494
3.08Z
364
2.27Z
NOx
4,006
92.19Z
11
0.24Z
10
0.23Z
319
7.34Z
* Aircraft engines overwhelmingly of classes noted.
-------
Table 2
Estimated Total Aircraft
JFK
AC
*TT2, T3, T4)
AT
(Tl, P2)
GA
(Tl, P2, PI)
APU
HC
9.082
99.35%
20
0.22*
26
0.282
14
0.15X
CO
14,513
95.98%
54
0.36%
161
1.06%
394
2.6%
NOx
3,141
90.7%
3
0.07%
5
0.15%
315
9.08%
Emissions at
Selected
Commercial Airports for 1975 in T/yr
LAX
HC
5,739
96.89%
37
0.62%
133
2.25%
15
0.24%
CO
10,243
91.65%
53
0.47%
538
4.81%
343
3.07%
NOx
3,349
89.38%
7
0.19%
45
1.2%
346
9.23%
ORD
HC
6,799
97.82%
91
1.31%
45
0.65%
16
0.22%
CO
13,876
93.61%
98
0.66%
432
2.91%
418
2.82%
NOx
4,562
90.99%
14
0.28%
9
0.18%
429
8.55%
* Aircraft engines overwhelmingly of classes noted.
-------
Table 3
Estimated Total Aircraft
JFK
HC CO
AC
*(T2, T3, T4)
AT
(Tl. P2)
GA
(Tl, P2, PI)
APU
Total AQCR
Emissions
X Aircraft
5,322
99. 2X
22
0.41%
-
21
0.39%
824,000
0.65%
12,080
95.23%
65
0.51%
-
540
4.26%
2,453,000
0.52%
NOx
3,913
89.61X
3
0.07Z
-
451
10.32X
-
Emissions at Selected Commercial
LAX
HC CO
3,761
97.59X
46
1.19%
. 25
0.65%
22
0.57%
817.000
0.47%
9,142
93.35%
65
0.66%
102
1.04%
485
4.95%
2,020,000
0.48%
NOx
4,282
89.29%
8
0.17%
9
0.18%
497
10.36%
-
Airports for 1980 in T/yr
ORD
HC CO
4.634
97.01%
120
2.5%
-
24
0.49%
789,000
0.61%
13,003
94.7%
158
1.15%
-
570
4.15%
1,311,000
1.05%
NOx
5,655
89.84%
19
0.29%
-
621
9.87%
-
(at selected airport)
* Aircraft engines overwhelmingly of classes noted.
-------
Table 4
Estimated Total Aircraft Emissions at Selected Commercial Airports for 1985 In T/yr
AC
*7l2, T3. T4)
AT
-------
can be attributed to changes in fleet mix by 1980 and the additional
effect of the phase in of aircraft subject to the currently mandated
controls and the proposed retrofit program. The total number of operations
are predicted to substantially increase in future years. The change in
fleet mix by 1980 is substantially the continuing replacement of older
narrow body jet carriers by newer wide body jets with improved control
over HC and CO emissions. Under the proposed retrofit program 12.5% of
the wide body jets are assumed retrofitted by 1980 and all wide body
jets are assumed either retrofitted or new by 1985. Partly as a spinoff
from the smoke retrofit programs for T3 and T4 class engines some older
aircraft also contribute to lower HC and CO emissions in the future
despite increased operations.
Although by 1985 a substantial number of auxiliary power units (APU) are
expected to meet the promulgated standards, the total APU emissions
increase throughout the 1972-1985 period of this study. The changing
fleet mix of air carrier aircraft includes increasing numbers of aircraft
with APUs. New commercial aircraft are commonly equipped with APUs
whereas, many older commercial aircraft comprising a large portion of
today's fleet are not so equipped. It may be noted here that the
increasing use of APUs lessens the need for ground based starting units.
Air taxi (AT) total emissions are predicted to Increase throughout the
1972-1985 period of the study. The study assumes that the current AT
aircraft models used at each airport will continue to be used in the
future and not replaced by different models. A 25Z replacement
-------
by 1985 with new aircraft of the same size but meeting promulgated
standards is assumed for most of the AT fleet. It is likely that such
will not be the case, however, because increases in passenger demand and
fuel costs create a tendency toward higher load factors and larger
aircraft. Thus, the AT fleet mix is likely to change with the intro
duction of new planes and used planes purchased from ACs both with
increased capacity. Unfortunately, no quantitative predictions of the
future AT fleet mixes were obtained.
General aviation (GA) total emissions taper off to negligible amounts at
the commercial aviation airports studied. JFK and ORD landing speed
requirements already limit GA operations to turbine powered and large
twin piston engine aircraft, thus effectively eliminating local and
pleasure operations by light piston engine aircraft. The GA is pre-
dominately business and executive flying at JFK and ORD. A similar
trend is evident at LAX, however, the landing speed requirements are not
as stringent and there is a little used but operational runway for GA at
LAX.
Tables 5, 6 and 7 summarize calculated estimates of the three pollutants
HC, CO and NOx dispersed from aircraft at six predominately GA airports
selected for study. Van Nuys (VNY), located in the Los Angeles basin,
was third in total operations and first in GA operations in the U.S. in
1974. Phoenix Sky Harbor (PHX) and Tamiami (TMB) are located in hot
sunny urban environments. Fairbanks International (FAI) has extremely
high GA activity for the community size and severe temperature inversions.
-------
Table 5
CY 1974 Summary of Total Emissions
From GA Aircraft at Selected Airports in T/yr
Airport Z of Total LTOs HC CO NOx
Van Nuys (VNY) 91.6 56 2488 10
Tamiami (1MB) 91.0 35 1551 6
Phoenix (PHX)* 71.0 33 1448 6
Fairbanks (FAI)** 86.4 14 631 3
San Jose Municipal (SJC). , .
San Jose Reid HV (RHV) ] 89'4 64 2827 12
* Includes piston engine AT
**Includes all AT as twin piston engine
-------
Table 6
FY 1980 Predicted Total Emissions From GA Aircraft at Selected Airports in T/yr
Airport
Van Nuya (VNY)
Tamlaai (1MB)
Phoenix (PHX)
Fairbanks (FAI)
San Jose Municipal (SJC)
San Joaa Raid HV (RHV)
FY
Airport
Van Nuya (VNY)
Tamiami (1MB)
Phoenix (PHX)
Fairbanks (FAI)
San Jose Minlclpal (SJC)
San Jose Raid HV (RHV)
Z of Total LTOs
91.0
92.7
72.6
89.7
} 89.6
1985 Predicted Total
Z of Total LTOs
91.0
92.8
73.0
89.4
] 89.3
HC
74
55
44
25
84
Emissions
HC
83
78
50
31
94
CO
3306
2429
1937
1128
3763
Table
From GA
CO
3714
3455
2199
1377
4212
NOx
13
9
8
4
15
7
Aircraft
NOx
15
13
9
5
17
Total AQCR Emissions
HC *Z Aircraft
817,000 0.009
-
186,000 0.02
-
501,000 0.02
* At selected airport.
CO
2,020,000
- .
376,000
-
1,003,000
Z Aircraft
0.16
-
0.52
-
0.38
at Selected Airports in T/yr
Total AQCR Emissions
HC *Z Aircraft
681,000 0.01
-
186,000 0.03
-
435,000 0.02
* At selected airport.
CO
1,061,000
-
219,000
-
560,000
Z Aircraft
0.35
-
1.00
-
0.75
-------
San Jose Municipal (SJC) and San Jose Reid Hillview (RHV) are located
within the environs of the city and combined for a city wide sample.
The operations at these airports are overwhelmingly by piston engine
aircraft and as a result the emissions are predominately CO. A worst
case of no standards for GA piston engine is assumed for the 1974-1985
period. The CO emissions increase with the increase of GA operations.
In two cases (1MB and FAI) the CO emissions can be expected to double.
-------
Appendix
Methodology for Computation of Aircraft Emissions
The methodology is dependent upon the predominance of either commercial
aviation operations or general aviation operations. Therefore, the
methodology is divided into two parts, i.e., airports representative of
heavy commercial usage and airports of heavy general aviation usage.
The commercial airports selected are located in highly urban communities.
The general aviation airports selected are located in highly urban
communities or communities with atmospheric conditions that emphasize
the effect of airborne pollutants.
The methodology of Part I of this Appendix is applied to commercial
airports and the methodology of Part II is applied to general aviation
airports. The following definitions apply to this study:
Definitions:
Air Carrier (AC) - All CAB Certified Route Air Carriers plus
supplemental, foreign-flag and intra-state commercial air carriers.
This category does not include Air Taxi (commuter air carriers), Military
or General Aviation flights.
Air Taxi (AT) - Air Taxi and commuter air carrier operation
carrying passengers, mail or cargo for revenue in accordance with FAR
Part 135 or Part 121.
-------
Certificated Route Air Carriers - Air carriers holding a Certificate
of Public Convenience and Necessity issued by the CAB to conduct scheduled
services over specified routes. Certain nonscheduled or charter operations
may also be conducted by these carriers.
Commuter Air Carriers - See Air Taxi.
Foreign-Flag Air Carriers (FF) - Commercial Air Carriers who do not
maintain the United States as the country in which ownership is located.
They do not file reports with CAB on airport activity but do generally
file with the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).
General Aviation (GA) - All aircraft activities not performed by
Air Carrier, Air Taxi, or Military aircraft.
Intra-State Air Carriers (I-S) - Air Carriers not required to
certify with the CAB but with scheduled routes primarily within a particular
state and primarily into one major airport. The study only uses this
category for those flights actually labelled Intra-State in the Official
Airline Guide10.
Itinerant Operations - Those aircraft operations which originate
from or are destined for another airport.
LTD Cycle - A cycle including both a landing and a takeoff of an
airplane. An LTO is equivalent to two aircraft operations or one departure
and one arrival.
-------
Local Operation - Operations performed by aircraft which:
a) Operate in the local traffic pattern or within sight of the tower.
b) Are known to be departing for, or arriving from, flight in
local practice areas located within a 20-mile radius of the
control tower.
c) Execute simulated instrument approaches or low passes at the
airport.
Operation - An aircraft arrival at or departure from an airport
with FAA airport traffic control serivce. There are two types of operations
- local and itinerant.
Supplemental Air Carriers (SUP) - Air Carriers which possess
Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity issued by the CAB for
the performance of planeload air freight and passenger charters throughout
the U.S. and most overseas countries. They are unscheduled operators.
U.S. Supplemental AC's are affiliated with the National Air Carrier
Association (NACA).
-------
Part I
Methodology for Computation of Aircraft Emissions
at Airports with High Levels of Commercial Usage
Los Angeles Internationl Airport (LAX), Chicago O'Hare Field (ORD) and
John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK), New York were selected as
airports representative of heavy commercial usage at present and to be
expected in the future. The overwhelming number of operations per year
are by aircraft of Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB) Certificated Route Air
Carriers.8'9'11
Categorical Breakdown of Operations at Selected Airports
The initial source of statistics for the number of operations at the
selected airports is Table 4 of the FAA Air Traffic Activity (ATA)
for Calendar Year 1972. This table lists the categorical total operations
of Military, General Aviation (GA), Air Taxi (AT) and Air Carrier (AC).
As shown below a breakdown by aircraft type is developed within each of
the categories, except Military. The Military constitutes 1.5% or less
of the operations at the airports selected and is discarded as beyond
the scope of this study since no Military Aircraft will be regulated.
The Categorical breakdown of operations is shown in Table 1-1 for each
airport selected and is explained below:
-------
Table 1-1
CY1972 Categorical Breakdown of Operations
JFK %_ LAX % ORD %.
670,737
- 3.585 0.5
667,152
-40.068 6.0
627,084
-45.477 6.8
581,607
-558.744 83.3
22,863
-10.092 1.5
12,771
0 0
12,771 1.9
FAA - ATA
MILTARY
GA & LOCAL
AT
AC
AAS
FF
I-S
SUP
369,418
- 1,048
368,370
- 21,401
346,9*9
-28,338
318,631
-238.564
80,067
-48,215
31,852
0
31,852
0.3
5.8
7.7
64.6
13.0
0
8.6
485,280
- 7,378
477,902
- 56,055
421,847
-50,284
371,563
-291,394
80,169
-7.470
72,699
-56,668
16,031
1.5
11.6
10.4
60.0
1.5
11.7
3.3
Air Carrier (AC)
The breakdown of AC into aircraft type includes four major categories. Table
9
7 of Airport Activity Statistics of Certificated Route Air Carriers (AAS).
published jointly by the CAB and FAA, presents the great majority of AC
departures (LTOs) per aircraft type. The AAS data do not include
Foreign-Flag, Intra-State or Supplemental Air Carriers which are included
in the Table 4, FAA Air Traffic Activity11, total.
Foreign-Flag (FF) LTOs are determined by searching and counting scheduled
flights into a particular city by foreign-based carriers as found in the
14
ICAO publication Traffic Flow - December 1972 . The assumption is made
that flights to and from the chosen city are made to the major airport
-------
under study at that city. The total number computed is then divided by
two to change flights to LTOs. This number is multiplied by 12 to
obtain the yearly LTOs, which are then multiplied by the "percent
scheduled departures completed" for international flights at that
airport as found in the AAS. Care must be taken to include only foreign
based airlines (including Canada and Mexico). The ICAO and FAA-CAB have
different definitions of an international flight, so some of the inter-
national flights of ICAO will not be appropriately adjusted by the
percent scheduled departures completed by international flights as
determined by FAA. But, the flights that conflict within the defini-
tions are so few and adjustment percentages are so very similar for
domestic and international flights that this procedure will result in
very minor error. Table 1-2 summarizes the 1972 FF LTOs for the selected
airports.
Table 1-2
1972 Foreign Flag Aircraft LTOs for Selected Airports
Aircraft Type JFK LAX ORD
B707
B720
B720B
B727
B747
DC-8
DC-8-61/63
DC-9
DC-10-30
VC-9
VC-10
5766
516
0
168
5832
2952
2190
4650
12
18
2448
931
0
134
0
372
2013
0
0
0
0
285
783
0
0
0
979
1146
0
2132
0
0
6
-------
Intra-State (I-S) LTOs are obtained from the total flights per week
listed in the Offical Airline Guide (OAG), North American Division10.
The total flights per week are multiplied by both 52 weeks and by the
AAS domestic "percent scheduled departures completed" factor for the
specific airport to obtain an estimate of the yearly total of LTOs.
Care must be taken only to include those carriers officially set aside
in the OAG as Intra-State Air Carriers who fly specifically into the
airport in the city observed. Each flight has the airplane type flown
on that flight listed in the OAG. Thus, the percentage of LTOs per year
of each aircraft type can be estimated and applied to the total I-S
LTOs for the year to obtain an estimate of yearly LTOs per aircraft
type. Although the OAG reference is limited to weekly scheduling as of
August 1, 1975, the use of a percentage for each aircraft applied to the
total I-S LTOs is felt sufficiently accurate because the fleet mix is
not likely to drastically change although the total usage may change
significantly from week to week and year to year. Only at LAX was I-S
Air Carrier operations found to be of significance. Table 1-3 summarizes
the I-S activity at LAX.
Table 1-3
1972 Intrastate Aircraft LTOs at LAX
Aircraft Type LTOs
B727-200 25531
B737 459
L-188 815
L1011 1529
-------
The total operations attributed to Supplemental Air Carriers at a
specific airport is the remainder after subtracting the sum of the AAS,
adjusted I-S and FF LTOs, multiplied by 2, from the total Air Carrier
operations of Table 4, FAA Air Traffic Activity . The number of
Supplemental Air Carrier operations is then distributed among the
Supplemental Air Carrier fleet by the following method.
Total departures of all Supplemental Air Carriers for 1972 are found in
the ICAO publication Non-Scheduled Air Transport 1972 . Only the top
seven carriers of the 12 listed are used (Capitol, McCulloch, Modern,
Overseas, Saturn, Trans-International, and World Airways) since of the
other five, by 1975 only one, Johnson Air Service, was still certified.
However, Johnson Air Service did not have a fleet capable of reaching
the major U.S. airports included in this study from its base in Missoula,
Montana. From the total departures the weighted percentages for each
carrier are determined and applied to the number of supplemental oper-
ations at each airport selected. Table I-4a summarizes the supplemental
operations. As a minor adjustment, the fleet for McCulloch Airways has
been halved and the Overseas National Airways fleet has increased by 50
percent from 1972 to 1975. As a result, half of the operations attributed
to McCulloch are redistributed to the enlarged fleet of Overseas to give
a more updated picture for 1975. The Supplemental Air Carrier fleet
mix is shown in Table I-4b.
-------
Table I-4a
1972 Estimated Supplemental Airline Operations for Selected Airports
Airline
Capitol
McCulloch
Modern
Overseas
Saturn
Trans-Int'l
World
Airline
Capitol
McCulloch
Modern
Overseas
Saturn
Trans-Int'l
World
Fraction of
0.0556
0.0581
0.0348
0.3361
0.2804
0.1012
0.1338
1972 - 1975
Total JFK
1771
1851
1108
10705
8931
3223
4262
Table I-4b
LAX
891
931
558
5388
4495
1622
2145
Supplemental Airline Fleet
Aircraft Type
DC-8-20/30
DC-8-50/62
DC-8-61/63
DC-8-20/30
L-188
CV-990
DC-8-20/30
DC-8-61/63
DC-9-30
DC-10-30
DC-8-61/63
L-188
L-100-30
DC-8-61/63
DC-10-30
DC-8-61/63
B747
B727-100
B707-320C
Number
4
1
5
1
4
8
7
4
5
2
3
9
12
8
3
5
3
4
2
ORD
710
742
444
4293
3581
1292
1709
Mix
-------
Each estimate of operations per supplemental Air Carrier per airport is
then divided by two and distributed among each carrier's fleet to determine
LTOs per aircraft type at a selected airport. Since the fleet mix is
heavily weighted by long range Jets it is reasonable to assume LTOs per
I
aircraft type at a selected airport are in proportion to the fleet mix.
Finally a sum is made of LTOs per aircraft type for each airport selected
as summarized in Table I-4c.
Table I-4c
1972 Supplemental Airline Aircraft LTOs for Selected Airports
Aircraft Type
DC-8-20/30
DC-8-50/62
DC-8-61/63
DC-9-30
DC-10-30
B707-320C
B727-100
B747
CV990
L-188
L-100-30
JFK
2621
89
4124
1487
1034
305
609
457
554
2415
2223
LAX
1319
45
2075
748
520
154
307
230
279
1216
1123
ORD
1051
36
1654
596
415
122
244
183
222
969
895
All the tables of Foreign-Flag, Intra-State, and Supplemental Air
Carrier LTOs by aircraft type are combined with the AAS data (already
broken down into LTOs per aircraft type) to obtain the overall Air
Carrier LTOs per aircraft type for 1972 as summarized in Table 1-5.
-------
Table 1-5
1972 Air Carrier LTOs for Selected Airports
Aircraft Type (Engines)
BAC111-200 (2RR-SPEY-MK506)
-400 (2RR-SPEY-MK511)
B727-100 (3JT8D)
-200 ( " )
DC-10-10 (3CF6-6D1)
DC-10-20 (3 JT9D)
DC-10-30 (3CF6-50)
B707-100B (4JT3D)
-300B ( " )
-300C ( " )
B720B ( " )
DC8-50/60 ( " )
B747 (4JT9D)
DC9-10 (2JT8D)
-30 ( " )
B737-200 ( " )
B720 (4JT3C)
DC-8-10 (4JT4A)
-20 ( " )
-30 ( " )
B707-300 ( " )
L1011 (3RR-RB211)
CV580 (2 All. 501-D13)
CV880 (4CJ805-3)
CV990 (4CJ805-23B)
VC9 (4RR CONWAY)
VC10 ( " )
L100-20/30 (4 A11.501-D22A)
L188 (4 A11.501-D13)
Falcon (2 TFE731-2)
FH-227 (2RR-DART7-532)
JFK
3216
37572
1764
0
1046
54804
18069
8852
543
11545
1382
16
2059
554
2466
2234
2428
3
841
LAX
0
59556
16860
0
1560
62993
12447
24397
9184
7889
1924
0
830
279
285
1559
2031
0
0
ORD
525
96531
8503
0
1244
56990
10227
62181
1987
9189
773
0
12271
222
6
1150
972
0
8218
-------
Table 1-5 (Continued)
Aircraft Type (Engines) JFK LAX ORD
F-27 (2RR-DART6-514) 0 3156 1
Jetstar (4TFE731-2) 005
DeHavilland Twin Otter
(2PT6A-27) 003
Air Taxi (AT)
The Official Airline Guide (OAG), North American Edition is used to
determine the total number of flights per week. Such flights are de-
signated as Commuter Air Carriers and exclude Intra-State, Foreign-Flag
and Supplemental which are included under Air Carrier above. To prevent
double counting only non-stop flights into the airport selected are
counted.
Each flight listed in the OAG also includes the type of airplane flown.
Thus, after totaling the number of flights per week per airplane type,
a breakdown of percent LTOs per aircraft type can be obtained. The
total AT operations from Table 4 of FAA Air Traffic Activity , is
divided by two and multiplied by each percentage to obtain an estimate
of the LTOs per aircraft type per year. Although the OAG reference is
limited to weekly scheduling as of August 1, 1975, the use of percentages
for each aircraft applied to the total AT LTOs, whether for CY 1972 or
CY 1975, is felt sufficiently accurate. The fleet mix is not likely to
drastically change although the total usage may change significantly
from week to week and year to year. Table 1-6 summarizes the LTOs per
AT aircraft type per year for 1972.
-------
Table 1-6
1972 Air Taxi LTOs for Selected Airports
Aircraft Type
DeHavilland Twin Otter
S B & H Skyliner
Convair 580
Sikorsky S-55 *
Bell 47J2 *
Beechcraft 99
Cessna 402
Swearingen Metro
General Prop A/C
Piper Navaho
Sikorsky S-61 *
JFK
4350
0
0
0
0
1814
0
0
199
1091
6722
LAX
14661
1567
458
5715
2743
0
0
0
0
0
0
ORD
403
0
0
0
0
8452
1274
10733
1878
0
0
*Helicopter .
General Aviation (GA)
General Aviation data acquistion suffers from the very minimal compilation
of statistics on GA activity for specific airports. The General
Aviation Activity Survey for 1972 developed by the FAA is a very good
breakdown of GA on a national basis. With minor alterations (for more
Air Taxi, less executive flying, etc.) the Survey could easily be used
for fleet projection at predominantly GA oriented airports, for which
activity statistics are apparently unavailable.
However, at some predominantly Air Carrier airports the GA fleet mix is
skewed because the required landing speed is substantially high and
-------
18
only the larger GA aircraft can land . GA aircraft usually are required
to use the same runways as the AC aircraft. With the longer delays and
taxi-idle times at these airports, the GA fleet mix is skewed toward
business and executive flying and other purposes of particular importance
in contrast to personal flying as defined in the above Survey on page 4.
Thus, more turboprop and turbojet aircraft are implied in the large AC
airport GA fleet mix compared to the national estimates of the Survey.
In order to obtain a better estimate of the GA, fleet mix at the particular
airports selected, individuals knowledgeable of GA activities at each
airport were contacted by telephone. Each AC airport appears to have a
business establishment (Butler Aviation at O'Hare, AiResearch Corp. at
Los Angles International) catering to this segment of the airport
activity. The New York Port Authority which operates John F. Kennedy
International compiles statistical information on GA at JFK. In the
case of business establishments, the knowledgeable persons are connected
with the dispatch or servicing of GA aircraft and can give rough, categorical
estimates of the GA activity in percentages by turbojet, turboprop,
large piston and small piston GA aircraft. Similar, but presumably more
accurate breakdowns of activity are available from the New York Port
Authority. Examples of aircraft by model are obtainable, but without a
breakdown in percent by model. From the models of aircraft, representative
engines for each category can be selected.
-------
Using Tables 24 and 25 of the 1973 Census of U.S. Civil Aircraft13.
the number of planes of each model operating in GA can be found on a
national basis. Applying these numbers to obtain ratios within each
category provides an estimate of the model breakdown by percentage
within the category (assuming the national GA fleet is spread uniformly
throughout the country). The percentages are then applied to total LTOs
by model. Although the categorical breakdown is based on data from 1972
to 1975, this procedure is believed to provide a more accurate and
credible estimate of the number of LTOs per model for GA at the AC
airports selected than could be estimated from the FAA General Aviation
Activity Survey directly.
Examples of this estimating procedure for the selected AC air
ports follows:
General Aviation Activity at O'Hare Airport (ORD)
Based on conversation with Tom Connel, Chief Dispatcher, Butler
Aviation, at ORD on July 31, 1975, the following fleet mix was estimated
for General Aviation activity at ORD:
50% turbojet
20% turboprop (King Air, Cessna 441)
30% piston (Cessna 310)
-------
An additional piece of information reported is that all aircraft
landing at ORD must maintain a speed of at least 200 knots on approach.
This almost eliminates single-engine piston aircraft LTOs. Tom Connel
also estimated that DC-3 or Martin 404 aircraft have at most 2 or 3 LTOs
per week (out of approximately 400 GA LTOs per week). The engine
categories for this fleet mix include:
50% turbojet (JT12A, CJ610, CF700, JT15D)
20% turboprop (PT6A-27)
30% piston (TS10-520)
The representative engine percentages for each category (by
proportional number of aircraft registered as General Aviation in
1973Tables 24 and 25 of Census of U.S. Civil Aircraft13) are:
50% turbojet 12.19% CF700 (148)
17.13% CF610 (208)
14.09% JT12 (171)
6.59% JT15 (80)
20% turboprop (PT6A-27)
30% piston (TSIO-520)
-------
These percentages are then applied to the total GA LTOs (operations)
obtained from FAA Air Traffic Activity (1972) and the Terminal Area
1-3
Forecast (1975-1985) to determine LTOs per engine type. All represented
aircraft have two engines.
General Aviation Activity at Los Angeles International Airport (LAX)
In conversation by telephone with Mike Castro, Customer Relations
Director, AiResearch, LAX, the following fleet mix was estimated for GA
activity at LAX:
75% turbojet (Learjet, Jetstar, Grumman G-2, Dassault Falcon)
15% turboprop (King Air)
9% larger piston (Cessna 310)
1% small piston (Cessna 150)
Air Traffic Controllers require small piston aircraft to approach
at cruise (approximately 130 knots as estimated by Mr. Castro). This
allows some small piston aircraft to land as shown in the fleet mix. A
separate runway exists at LAX for small planes but is used very rarely.
The small runway is primarily used by Butler Aviation and AiResearch,
who have facilities at the south end of LAX near this runway.
The representative engine percentages for each category are as
follows (by number of aircraft registered as General Aviation in 1973
- Table 24 of Census of U.S. Civil Aircraft13):
-------
75% turbojet
Learjet 26.62% CJ610
Grumman G-1159 15.10% Spey 511
Jetstar (L1329) 14.85% TFE731
Falcon 18.43% CF700
(208)
(118)
(116)
(144)
15% turboprop
9% larger piston
1% small piston
PT6A-27
TSIO-520
10-520
Again, these percentages are applied to total GA LTOs found for
LAX. The small piston category is assumed to include only single-engine
aircraft. All other categories have two engines per aircraft with the
exception of the Jetstar.
General Aviation Activity at John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK)
In phone conversations with Joe Windisch of the New York Port
Authority, the following fleet mix was quoted for both 1972 and 1975 for
19
GA activity .
1972 1975 Weight Class
21.6% 8.4% >30,000#
18.7% 27.1% 12,500-30,000
16.1% 26.0% 7,500-12,500
24.4% 26.0% 3,000-7,500
19.2% 12.5% <3,000
Type
Large Jet & Turboprop
Small Business Jet
Small Turboprop
Small Twin Engine Piston
Single Engine Piston
-------
The large jets and turboprop aircraft in GA are expected to continue
dropping in usage in favor of the small business jets. Thus, aircraft
such as the F27, Gulfstream 1 & 2 and Jetstar will likely be supplanted
by Learjets, Saberliners and Falcons. The small turboprop and twin
piston engine aircraft fleet is expected to increase with the trend to
smaller business aircraft, however, the small single piston engine
aircraft fleet is expected to diminish rapidly, in terms of numbers of
operations at JFK. Overall, GA activity is expected to diminish rapidly
at JFK to a negligible amount by 1980.
The representative engine mix by percentage for each category is
as follows (by number of aircraft registered as General Aviation in
13
1973 - Tables 24 and 25 of Census of Civil Aircraft ). The large jet
and turboprop category has the percentages corrected for the mix of two
and four engine aircraft.
1972 1975 Engine Percent
21.6% 8.4% 34% Dart 7-532
(Large jet & turboprop) 8% Allison 501-D13
20% Spey Mk. 511
38% TFE 731-2
18.7% 27.1% 11% JT15D
(Small Business Jet) 54% CF610
19% CF700
16% Viper 601
16.6% 26.0% 44% TPE 331
(Small Turboprop) 56% PT6A-27
24.4% 26.0% 100% Cont. TSIO-520
(Small Twin Engine Piston)
19.2% 12.5% 100% Cont. 10-520
(Single Engine Piston)
The percentages are applied to the total GA LTOs found for JFK.
-------
General Aviation Comment
In. the overall study the GA section has been maintained separately
to facilitate the infusion of hard statistics at a later date. The
approximations and estimates are believed reasonable because emission
characteristics do not vary greatly within the general GA categories,
and more importantly, GA activity will be phased out or reduced to less
than 1% in the near future at the major AC airports selected. Table 1-7
summarizes the engine LTOs for GA at selected AC airports.
Table 1-7
1972 Engine LTO's for General Aviation at Selected Commercial Airports
Engine Type
CF 700
CJ 610
JT 12
JT 15D-4
Spey MK511
TFE 731
PT 6A-27
TPE 331
Viper 601
Allison 501-D13
Dart 7-532
TSIO-520
10-520
JFK
LAX
ORD
760
2161
0
440
925
1757
1930
1516
640
370
1572
5222
2055
10331
14922
0
0
8464
8324
8408
0
0
0
0
5044
280
4884
6864
5646
2640
0
0
8014
0
0
0
0
12020
0
Auxiliary Power Units (APU)
Duty time data for APUs, defined as the time per LTD in which
the APU is operating, are not extensive. Three reports from airlines
were received in private communications from AiResearch Corp. These
-------
reports disclose a very wide range of duty times among the airlines not
only with respect to dissimilar aircraft but even with respect to the
same aircraft types. AiResearch provided average numbers for small,
medium and large APU duty times with the reports, but because APU
emission data exist and vary widely for the variety of APUs, a more
detailed estimate has been prepared.
In order to reduce the impact of error due to the wide range of
duty times, a three factor procedure is used. Lowest, highest, and
average duty times are computed from the shortest, longest and mean time
periods attributed to each aircraft APU duty time. The variation
between lowest and highest emissions can cause total baseline airport
emission from aircraft to vary as much as 1% for HC, 2% for CO and 6%
for NOx. The variation in duty times is by a factor of two or more
between the lowest and highest. Thus, the lowest and highest values
should not be used other than to obtain an emission range. An arith-
metic mean or median number could ease the dilemma as to which data are
more accurate, and lessen any possible error. Unfortunately, there is
no indication in the data of the effect the time the APU is utilized on
overnight layovers has on the average duty time. The computation of
such an average number having adequate accuracy is therefore difficult.
The following classes of aircraft, are used to determine the
duty times:
1) Medium range jets (727, 737, DC9, BAC111)
2) DC-10 and L1011
3) B747
-------
The DC-10 and L1011 are added-as a separate class because only one
duty time data point was obtained and is substantially less than the
averages for the medium size jets and any of the B747 data. The DC-10
and L1011 (along with the B747) are certified by the FAA to operate the
AFU during climbout, in-flight and descent modes of operation, unlike
the medium size jets. The DC-10 and L1011 are approximately mid-way
between the medium jets and B747 in size, therefore the data point was
adjusted accordingly to make the AFU duty times consistent with respect
to size of aircraft, a trend the data generally appears to indicate.
More detail would require a statistical study of actual APU duty times
at each of the selected airports for each size of aircraft and possibly
each type of aircraft in a manner similar to studies of average taxi-
idle time discussed below.
Both the median and arithmetic mean was found for each class. For
the medium jet classes the mean and median correspond very closely. 80
minutes is used as the duty cycle average time for this class. For the
B747, the arithmetic mean, rounded off to 180 minutes, is selected since
it appears to best compensate for the data spread. However, both these
duty times selected as representative are only best estimates. The DC-
10 and L1011 duty time is selected as an intermediate mean between the
medium jet and the B747 classes (130 minutes per LTO).
The final results are as follows:
Duty Cycle Time (Minutes)
Class Lowest Highest Representative Time*
Medium Jet 30 120 80
DC-10 and L1011 85 205 130
B747 145 295 180
-------
does not represent average of best and worst case but is based on
round off of the average of actual data received.
The appropriate representative time is combined with the LTOs for
each type of aircraft and the emission factors for the particular APU
unit on board that aircraft. The APU computations do not include the
contribution of ground based units nor do the computations include the
ground based operation (outside of taxi-idle time) of the main engines
on those aircraft unequipped with APUs. Some business and executive GA
jets are equipped with APUs, however, for purposes of this study such
contribution has been neglected as of negligible importance. Table 1-8
summarizes the use (LTOs) per year for 1972 of APUs at the selected AC
airports.
Table 1-8
CY1972 Auxiliary Power Unit Use (LTOs) at Selected Commercial Airports
Aircraft
BAG 111
B 727
DC-10
B 747
DC-9
L1011
B 737
L 188
* Minutes
APU
GTCP 85-115
GTCP 85-98
TSCP 700-4
GTCP 660-4
GTCP 85-98
ST6C
GTCP 85-129
GTC 85-90
^rt V*.
Time*
80
80
130
180
80
130
80
80
JFK
3216
37572
2810
18069
8813
1382
39
2428
LAX
0
59556
6140
12447
7396
1924
17001
2031
ORD
525
96775
8918
10227
43203
773
18978
972
GTCP 85-98 Data
Determination of Taxi-Idle Time at Selected Airports (T-I)
Because of the relatively high HC and CO emissions of gas turbine
engines at very low thrust or power levels, the typical taxi-idle (T-I)
time is estimated for each of the selected airports by the following
procedure.
-------
For purposes of this study T-I time includes two major parts. The
first part is the time an AC aircraft takes from touchdown until the
engines are shut down at the gate. Added to this is the departure time
from engine start-up until the start of the take-off run of the aircraft.
Some of the data obtained broke down these two parts further, however,
all the data includes the same total time period with the same end
points.
No official U.S. statistical service which undertakes compilations
of aircraft data were located having data for T-I times. The most
important source of data is a series of tables compiled by four major
airlines (TWA, American, Eastern, and United) estimating time breakdowns
20
for the various ground operations of the aircraft . Two additional
studies give second-hand, observed information for Los Angeles Inter-
5 21
national and Chicago O'Hare International . The data is summarized in
Table 1-9 and mean taken to determine the average taxi-idle times at
LAX, ORD and Kennedy International (JFK) .
Table 1-9
Taxi-Idle (T-I) T-tm«*s at Selected Commercial Airports
Airline
TWA
AA
EA
UAL
Ref. 1-13
Ref. 1-14
Average T-I Time
4.
JFK
33.00
31.50*
33.00
26.00
___
31
4-
LAX
24.00
24.00*
15.00
20.80
___
~21
4.
ORD
28.00
30.50*
___
22.00
15.80
24
* Based on arithmetic average of data given
+ Time in minutes
-------
The data used for this study is very limited and based on estimates
and observations. The times are fairly consistent at each airport. A
more comprehensive data set with more observations at each airport is
required if a more accurate average taxi-idle time is desired. At
present, more data on average taxi-idle times for commercial air transports
is apparently not available. T-I times for AT and GA are assumed equal
to that above for AC because the same runways and taxiways are utilized
for all aircraft with the exception of a few GA flights on a small
runway at LAX.
The T-I time for each airport selected is combined with emission
factors for idle mode on an hourly basis and flight mode emission factors
for each type of aircraft to calculate the emission factors for each
type of plane at each airport as explained below.
Emission Factor (E.F.) Calculations
The emission factors are tabulated in Tables 1-10, 1-11 and 1-12
for each engine type used by aircraft at that airport. The flight mode
and idle mode data utilized to calculate the emission factors was the
best available to EPA at the time this study was commenced and was
obtained from a wide variety of engine manufacturers, industry groups
and other government agencies. Although much of the emissions data
available to EPA has been updated subsequent to commencement of this
study, the overall results of the study would be negligably affected by
the inclusion of more recent emission factor data for some of the engines.
The tables labeled "current" comprise emission factors for engines
currently in use and are utilized for calculations pertaining to 1972
-------
and 1975. The tables labeled "modified" comprise engines modified or
new as a result of EPA 1979 standards and are incorporated into the
calculations for 1980 and 1985 as appropriate to account for the portions
of the aircraft fleet having engines manufactured after the implementation
dates of the EPA standards.
Each engine emission factor incorporating the pertinent T-I time
for each selected airport is calculated using the following equation:
E'F'airport ' (E'F'T-I> * ^time/60' + E'F'flight mode
where
E.F. . fc is in Ibs./LTO
airport
E.F. _ is in Ibs./hr.
E.F.,-. . . is in Ibs./LTO
flight mode
T-I . is in minutes
time
-------
Table 1-10
Computed Engine Emission Factors (JFK)
31 Min. - Taxi Idle
Engine
JT9D
JT8D
JT3D
JT3C
JT4A
Spey
MK 511
MK 506
RB-211-22B
RR-Conway
M45H
Dart 7-532-7
Dart 6-514
JT15D-4
Viper 601
JT9D-7
JT9D-70A
JT8D-217
JT3D-3B
JT15D-4
PT6A-41
PT6A-27
TPE 331-3
CFM 56
HC
25.0
6.7
61.5
25.0
80.2
34.4
21.1
48.5
7.1
2.6
2.3
3.9
4.4
4.30
4.42
1.59
34.4
0.46
0.43
0.34
0.44
1.19
CO
71.4
28.1
73.5
54.8
82.4
34.4
58.4
68.3
35.9
2.3
2.0
10.2
44.0
23.2
24.0
8.5
48.5
2.72
2.33
1.89
2.40
10.1
NOx
26.4
10.9
6.3
6.2
8.1
8.5
19.8
13.2
2.33
1.4
1.2
1.1
0.93
Modified
14.3
14.4
5.3
9.36
0.97
0.66
0.48
0.64
6.2
Engine
CJ 805-3B
CJ 805-23B
CJ 610-6
CF 700-2D
CF 6-6D1
CF 6-50A
PT6A-27
TFE 731-2-3
TPE 331-3
Allison
501D-13
501D-22A
Continental
TSIO-520
10-520
and New Engines after 1979
CJ 610-6
CF 700-2D
CF 6-6D
CF 6-50A
TFE 731-3
RB 211-22B
M45H
Spey
MK 511
Current Engines
HC
14.
13.
5.0
4.4
21.2
22.6
2.6
2.4
5.1
3.8
4.1
1.35
1.17
3.0
2.6
.22
.84
3.
3.
0.66
2.
1,
83
26
CO
37.2
35.7
51.0
44.0
49.0
57.2
3.7
6.2
4.0
8.5
3.7
22.7
26.8
3.85
52.3
45.2
17.2
20.6
3.87
15.2
7.4
11.6
(Lbs/LTO)
NOx
6.0
5.8
0.82
0.93
20.8
32.4
0.35
1.6
0.64
2.5
2.2
0.11
0.063
0.82
0.92
10.3
12.4
1.36
9.2
2.33
9.00
-------
Table 1-11
Computed Engine Emission Factors (LAX)
21 Min. - Taxi Idle
Current Engines
Engine
JT9D
JT8D
JT3D
JT3C
JT4A
Spey
MK 511
MK 506
RB-211-22B
RR-Conway
M45H
Dart 7-532-7
Dart 6-514
PT6A-27
JT9D-7
JT9D-70A
JT8D-217
JT3D-3B
CFM56
PT6A-41
PT6A-27
TPE 331-3
HC
17.03
4.57
41.86
17.07
54.54
23.43
14.81
32.94
4.99
1.74
1.52.
1.78
2.97
3.07
1.11
23.37
0.83
0.30
0.24
0.30
CO
48.98
19.73
51.26
38.02
57.58
24.41
43.41
47.58
25.89
1.68
1.47
2.60
15.9
16.45
6.03
33.74
7.34
1.65
1.34
1.66
NOx
24.98
10.22
5.93
5.70
7.74
8.34
19.55
12.47
2.16
1.304
1.14
0.31
Modified
13.02
13.21
4.82
8.84
5.79
0.55
0.41
0.58
Engine
CJ805-3B
CJ805-23B
CJ610-6
CF700-2D
CF6-6D1
CF6-50A
TFE 731-2-3
TPE 331-3
Allison
501 D-13
501 D-22A
Continental
TSIO-520
10-520
and New Engines After 1979
CJ610-6
CF700-2D
CF6-6D
CF6-50A
TFE 731-3
RB211-22B
Spey
MK 511
Continental
TSIO-520
10-520
HC
9.74
9.31
3.44
3.01
14.34
15.33
1.63
3.42
2.62
2.76
0.97
0.85
2.11
1.80
2.18
2.61
0.48
1.97
2.61
0.50
i (Lba/LTO)
CO
26.58
25.48
37.79
32.13
33.41
39.10
4.43
2.940.
5.91
2.67
19.26
24.39
38.68
32.93
11.75
14.06
2.79
10.62
7.86
NOx
5.75
5.50
0.75
0.86
20.08
31.73
1.54
58
2.22
2.07
0.11
0.06
0.75
0.85
9.92
11.79
1.28
8.82
8.83
11.09
0.40
-------
Table 1-12
Computed Engine Emission Factors (ORD)
24 Mln. - Taxi Idle
Engine
JT9D
JT8D
JT3D
JT3C
JT4A
Spey
MK 511
MK 506
RB211-22B
RR-Conway
M45H
Dart 7-532-7
Dart 6-514-7
CF 700
CJ610,
JT12 J
JT15D-4
JT9D-7
JT9D-70A
JT8D-217
JT3D-3B
CFM56
PT6A-41
HC
19.43
5.19
47.76
19.45
62.24
26.73
16.68
37.62
5.61
1.98
1.73
3.42
3.90
3.06
3.37
3.47
1.25
26.69
0.94
0.34
CO
55.72
22.23
57.94
43.05
65.03
27.42
47.91
53.80
28.9
1.87
1.63
35.69
41.97
8.13
18.10
18.70
6.77
38.16
8.16
1.85
NOx
25.40
10.42
6.03
5.84
7.85
8.38
19.62
12.69
2.21
1.34
1.67
0.88
0.77
1.00
M<
13.39
13.56
4.96
9.00
5.92
0.58
Current Engines
Engine
CJ805-3B
CJ805-23B
CF6-6D1
CF6-50A
TFE 731-2-3
TPE 331-3
Allison
501D-13
501D-22A
PT6A-27
Continental
TSIO-520
10-520
HC
11.10
10.62
16.39
17.52
1.85
3.91
2.98
3.15
2.03
1.09
0.95
CO
29.77
28.54
38.06
44.53
4.96
3.11
6.69
2.97
2.92
20.30
25.10
(Lbs/LTO)
NOx
5.83
5.58
20.23
31.93
1.56
0.60
2.31
2.12
0.32
0.11
0.62
Modified and New Engines After 1979
CF6-6D
CF6-50A
TFE731-3
RB211-22B
M45H
TPE-331-3
2.49
2.98
0.53
2.23
1.01
0.34
13.39
16.02
3.11
12.00
5.94
1.88
10.03
11.96
1.30
8.93
2.21
0.59
-------
The emissions factors for APU's are summarized in Table 1-13.
Table 1-13
Auxiliary Power Unit Emission Factors
All Airports (Ibs/hr)
Current
Engine HC CO NOx
GTCP85-98 0.050 1.907 1.730
" -115ck 0.009 1.430 1.641
" -129 0.055 2.363 1.516
GTCP 660-4 0.24 9.50 5.84
TSCP 700-4 0.12 0.61 4.54
ST6C 0.51 2.78 4.00
Modified
GTCP 85-98 0.04 1.40 0.84
GTCP 660-4 0.20 6.00 3.60
GTCP 700-4 0.09 0.55 2.25
ST6C 0.10 0.60 2.46
-------
Final Total Aircraft Emissions Calculations
The final calculations require the following items of data from the
preceeding calculations.
1) The breakdown of LTOs per aircraft type per airport.
2) The emission factors per engine type per airport (E.F. )
3) The number and type of engine on each aircraft.
4) The type of auxiliary power unit (APU) on those aircraft so
equipped.
5) The emission factors for APUs (E.F. in Ibs/hr).
6) The representative duty time per LTD for APUs.
For each aircraft type at a selected airport the following equation
is used to determine emissions:
(#LTOs) * (# engines) * (Engine E'F-airTJOrt) * Emissions per type
HC, CO, NOx
By units, this is:
(LTO - Aircraft) * (Number of Engines) * (Lbs. pollutant) - (Lbs. pollutant)
Year Aircraft Engine-LTO Year
And the results summarized in Tables 1-14 through 1-22 Inclusive:
-------
TABLE 1-14
1972 Air Carrier Emissions for JFK
AIRCRAFT TYPE
BAG 111-200
-400
B727-100
-200
DC-10-10
-20
-30
B707-100B
-300B
-300C
-B720B
DC-8-50/60
B747
DC-9-10
-30
B737-200
B720
DC-8-10
-20
-30
B707-300
L1011
CV580
CV880
CV990
VC9
VC10
L100-20/30
L188
FALCON
FH-227
F-27
JETSTAR
DTO
*HC
221,261
755,197
112,190
0
70,919
13,481,784
1,806,900
118,617
54,300
3,703,636
87,481
122
117,775
30,359
478,404
36,638
36,906
14
4,373
0
0
0
CO
221,261
2,457,209
259,308
0
179,494
16,112,376
5,160,506
497,482
119,026
3,805,232
242,126
272
306,379
79,111
673,711
33,063
82,552
37
3,869
0
0
0
NOx
54,672
1,228,604
110,074
0
101,671
1,381,061
1,908,086
192,974
13,466
374,058
82,091
80
49,416
12,853
130,205
19,659
24,280
10
2,355
0
0
0
*LBS/YR
-------
Table 1-15
1972 Air Carrier Emissions For LAX
Aircraft Type
BAG 111-200
-400
B727-100
-200
DC-10-10
-20
-30
B707-100B
-300B
-300C
B720B
DC-8-50/60
B747
DC-9-10
-30
B737-200
B720
DC-8-10
-20
-30
B707-300
L1011
CV580
CV880
CV990
VC9
VC10
L100-20/30
LI 88
Falcon
FH-227
F-27
Jetstar
DTO
*HC
0
0
816,513
241,772
0
23,915
10,547,548
847,890
222.989
156,771
1,720,955
85,483
0
32,320
10,390
0
37,552
17,211
21,285
0
0
9,594
0
0
CO
0
0
3,525,120
563,293
0
60,996
12,916,085
2,438,616
962,706
349,176
1,816,879
250,563
0
88,246
28,436
0
54,241
16,650
48,013
0
0
9,279
0
0
NOx
0
0
1,825,987
338,549
0
49,499
1,494,194
1,243,704
498,675
52,349
244,228
112,843
0
19,090
6,138
0
14,216
12,909
18,035
0
0
7,196
0
0
*Lbs/Yr
-------
Table 1-16
1972 Air Carrier Emissions For ORD
Aircraft Type
BAC111-200
-400
B727-100
-200
DC-10-10
-20
-30
B707-100B
-300B
-300C
B720B
DC-8-50/60
B747
DC-9-10
-30
B737-200
B720
DC-8-10
-20
-30
B707-300
L1011
CV580
CV880
CV990
VC9
VC10
L100-20/30
L188
Falcon
FH-227
F-27
Jets tar
DTO
*HC
28,067
0
1,506,787
418,093
0
21,786
10,887,274
794,842
645,439
154,589
2,287,693
38,681
0
544,832
9,431
0
903
14,490
11,580
0
32,543
3
37
12
CO
28,791
0
6,453,925
970,873
0
55,373
13,207,887
2,279,394
2,764,567
342,161
2,390,243
111,103
0
1,461,231
25,344
0
1,291
13,662
25,997
0
30,735
3
99
18
NOx
8,799
0
3,025,187
516,047
0
39,705
1,374,587
1,039,063
1,295,852
46,416
288,535
45,499
0
286,160
4,955
0
305
9,752
8,977
0
22,024
3
31
2
*lbs/Yr
-------
Table 1-17
1972 Air Taxi Emissions For JFK
Aircraft Type HC CO NOx
Beechcraft 99 9,430 13,420 1,270
DeHavilland Twin Otter 22,620 32,190 3,045
Piper Navaho* 3,482 58,544 284
* Includes Misc. Propeller Aircraft
Table 1-18
1972 Air Taxi Emissions For LAX
Aircraft Type HC C0_ NOx
DeHavilland Twin Otter 52,191 76,235 8,972
SB & H Skyliner 10,715 12,344 1,827
Convair 580 2,397 5,408 2,031
Table 1-19
1972 Air Taxi Emissions For OSD
Aircraft Type HC CO NOx
DeHavilland Twin Otter 1,634 2,350 256
Beechcraft 99 34,315 49,360 5,375
Swearingen Metro 83,928 66,756 12,879
Cessna 402 2,763 51,699 275
Misc. Propeller Aircraft 13,982 11,121 2,146
-------
Table 1-20
1972 General Aviation Emissions for JFK
Engine Type HC CO NOx
Dart 7-532 4,087 3,616 2,201
Allison 501-D13 1,406 3, 145 925
Spey 511 31,820 31,820 7,863
TFE 731-2 4,217 10,893 2,811
JT15D 1,716 4,488 484
CJ610 10,805 110,211 1,772
CF700 3,344 33,440 707
Viper 601 2,816 28,160 595
TPE 331 7,732 6,064 970
PT6A-27 5,018 7,141 676
TCM TSIO-520 7,050 118,539 574
TCM 10-520 2,404 55,074 129
-------
Table 1-21
1972 General Aviation Emissions For LAX
Engine Type HC CO NOx
Spey 511 198,269 206,606 70,573
TFE 731-2 13,568 36,875 12,819
CJ610 51,332 567,334 11,162
CF700 31,096 331,935 8,833
PT6A-27 14,966 21,861 2,573
TCM TSIO-520 4,905 97,147 540
TCM 10-520 237 6,829 17
-------
Table 1-22
1972 General Aviation Emissions For ORD
Engine Type HC CO NOx
CJ610 13,392 288,082 5,292
CF700 16,703 174,310 4,278
JT12 22,031 236,963 4,353
JT15D 8,078 21,450 2,640
PT6A-27 16,268 23,401 2,548
TCM TSIO-520 13,042 243,982 1,298
-------
For each aircraft AFU the following equation is used to determine
emissions:
(//LTO;
s) * (Duty time^) * (AFU E.F.^ ^
AFU Emissions per aircraft type per airport.
By units, this is:
(LTOs - Aircraft) * (Number of minutes) * 1 *
Year aircraft-LTO 60
(Lbs. pollutant) = (Lbs. pollutant)
Hour Year
And the results summarized in Tables 1-23, 1-24 and 1-25:
Table 1-23
1972 Auxiliary Power Unit Emissions For JFK
Aircraft Type
BAC111
B727
DC10
B747
DC9
L1011
B737
L188
HC
CO
NOx
39
2,505
731
13,010
588
1,527
3
162
6,132
95,533
3,714
514,967
22,409
8,324
123
6,174
7,037
86,666
27,641
316,569
20,329
11,977
79
5,601
-------
Table 1-24
1972 Auxiliary Power Unit Emissions For LAX
Aircraft Type HC CO NOx
B727 3,970 151,431 137,376
DC10 1,596 8,115 60,397
B747 8,962 354,740 218,071
DC9 492 18,806 17,060
L1011 1,063 8,546 16,675
B737 1,247 53,564 34,365
L188 135 5,164 4,685
Table 1-25
1972 Auxiliary Power Unita Emissions For OKD
Aircraft Type HC CO NOx
BAC111 6 1,001 1,149
B727 6,452 246,067 223,228
DC10 2,319 11,786 87,718
B747 7,363 291,470 179,177
DC9 2,880 109,851 99,655
L1011 854 4,656 6,699
B737 1,392 59,793 38,361
L188 65 2,471 2,242
All of the above calculations per aircraft type per airport are
then summed to obtain the total AC, AT, GA and APU emissions for each of
the pollutants (HC, CO, NOx) per airport. (See summary Tables 1-59,
[JFK], 1-60 [LAX] and 1-61 [ORD]).
For analytical or comparison purposes these above totals are mani-
pulated three more times;
1) Divide by 2000 to obtain tons per year;
-------
2) Divide by 365 to obtain tons per day;
3) Divide by the area of land covered by the airport to obtain
2
an emission density result (tons/day-mile ).
The primary reason for the further calculations is to compare the data
to data which already exists in the three above mentioned forms.
In future years (1980 and 1985) complications arise in the applica-
tion of emission factors with the advent of newly manufactured engines
produced to meet the 1979 emissions standards and the inbreeding of
retrofit requirements with regard to some of the large AC engines for
emissions and the JT3D for smoke. Thus, in some cases the aircraft LTOs
per year for 1980 and 1985 are divided to account for that portion of
the fleet with modified or new engines as explained below.
Helicopter Operations
Helicopter operations now comprise a significant portion of the
LTOs at John F. Kennedy International Airport. In particular, for CY
1972 S-61 helicopters of New York Airways comprised 8.7% of the depar-
9
tures for Certified Route Air Carriers . However the S-61 flights
apparently all occur between the four principle airports of the New York
Metropolitan area and as such are more properly classified with the Air
Taxi fleet or as local operations. For purposes of this study the
helicopters at JFK have been considered Air Taxis and comprise 47% of
-------
the AT fleet. Because helicopter LTO cycles as a function of time
typical for the airports selected remain unknown and emissions standards
are not anticipated in the near future, an estimate of emissions contri-
bution from helicopter operations is not included in this study. Heli-
copter operations might better be approached by considering all four New
York airports and the entire flights, the major portions of which are
below 3000 ft. (914.4 m).
Aircraft Population and LTO Projections to 1985
Aircraft population figures are determined for the calendar years
1972, 1975, 1980, and 1985. As noted above, figures are available from
a variety of sources for CY 1972 and some figures from 1973, 1974 and
1975 also are available; however, some projection figures are utilized
from earlier sources for 1975 calculations because this study was
commenced during calendar year 1975. Predictions of future operations
(1980 and 1985) are obtained primarily from the FAA Terminal Area Fore-
o
casts for each of the selected airports. However, the predictions for
John F. Kennedy International (JFK) are very questionable; they imply a
rapid increase in local and general aviation (GA) which contradicts the
trend to negligible GA activity before 1980 at JFK and other predominantly
commerical aviation airports. Discussion with Joe Windisch of the New
York Fort Authority indicated that the FAA predictions for increases in
AC and GA activity at JFK are not currently accepted by the Port Authority,
but, rather that most if not all increases in passenger loading will be
absorbed by an increasing load factor and an increasing proportion of
19
wide body jets. Even the shuttle services and possibly the commuter
-------
(AT) increases in passenger loading will be accomodated by increasing
the size of the aircraft rather than the number of operations.
Table 1-26 for the airports selected is derived by interpolation
Q
from corresponding tables listed in the FAA Terminal Area Forecasts,
and the FAA Air Traffic Activity 1972.1~1 The data for 1980 and 1985
are adjusted to be more realistic in the particular case of JFK.
Table 1-26
Operations Forecasts for the Selected Airports
JFK
LAX
ORD
(xlO~3)
Total
AC
AT
Local (GA)
Military
Total
AC
AT
Local (GA)
Military
Total
AC
AT
Local (GA)
Military
CY1972
369
319
28
21
1
485
372
50
56
7
671
582
45
40
4
FY1975
346
299
31
15
1
475
366
56
48
5
696
597
61
38
3
FY1980
400
355
35
10*
0
515
431
72
11
0
735
656
79
0
0
FY1985
450
399
40
11*
0
540
443
96
1
0
764
659
105
0
0
*Helicopter Only
+Actual
-------
Table 1-27
Percent Forecaat of Air Carrier Operations
by Equipment Type
*JFK
B747
DC10/L1011
DC8-61/63
B707/DC8
B727-200
B727-100
B737/DC9
T-PROP
PISTON
HEL'R
'72
11
2
7
36
8
14
7
9
6
'75
13
9
3
32
10
14
13
6
'80
16
15
3
19
15
10
16
6
'85
20
20
2
10
20
4
18
6
'72
7
4
5
35
23
10
13
3
__
*LAX
'75
7
15
2
25
23
11
16
1
__
'80
9
20
2
15
31
5
19
M_
'85
13
25
1
7
34
2
18
__
'72
3
3
4
23
12
22
22
10
1
*ORD
'75
3
9
3
14
18
20
23
9
1
'80
5
15
2
7
26
11
30
4
«
'85
8
19
1
3
33
5
31
__
*1972 and 1975 are actual percentages
-------
Air Carrier (AC)
The projections are generally obtained as percentages from Table B
of the Fleet Projection Tables distributed by the FAA and entitled
12
Equipment Forecast for the Top 25 Air Carrier Airports 1975 - 2000.
Table 1-27 is obtained from the Equipment Forecast but includes 1972
actual operations derived from Table 1-5.
For the Air Carrier sub-grouping, the projected operations are
given in the percentage each equipment type will produce of the total
Air Carrier operations at the particular airport. The equipment types
are further classified into groups that are in operation today or are
known to be in the design stage. It is assumed that derivatives of the
wide-body jets may be available in the latter part of the forecast
period. However, they are classified by today's designation for this
forecast. The equipment is broken down into 10 major groups, including
both passenger and all cargo models. Each major group and the further
development within the group devised in particular for this study are as
follows:
747: (includes 747 and derivatives of 747) Due to no definite
information as to any derivatives planned beyond the 747
SP, only 747's with JT9D engines are included in this
category.
-------
DC10/L1011: (Includes DC-10, L1011 and derivatives) This
involves four engine types on four aircraft: DC-10-10 with
CF6-6D1 engines, DC-10-20 (sometimes labeled DC-10-40) with
JT9D powerplants, DC-10-30 powered by CF6-50 engines, and the
L-1011 with RB-211 engines. The FAA apparently does not break
this total fleet down in any of the data compiled. A procedure
disclosed below takes into account the present fleet nationally,
specific airport adjustments, and other relevant factors to
determine a weighted percentage of LTOs for each type of air-
craft. An important problem with the analysis of this category
is that all of the planes remain in production.
The DC-101s and LlOll's are chosen by different airlines (only
Delta has had both types of aircraft at any time). These airlines fly
heavily into some major airports and lightly into others, thereby defeat-
ing any national average application as being much too gross an estimate.
The newly produced aircraft are entering the fleet in somewhat equal
proportions year-by-year. But DC-101s still retain an advantage, having
entered the fleet in 1971 whereas LlOll's were not delivered until 1972.
Among specific airports, however, the relative proportions of DC-10's
and LlOll's change dramatically.
In determining the number of LTOs per aircraft, 5 assumptions are
used to set up the intial basis:
-------
(1) DC-10-lO's will retain a high percentage of DC-10 U.S. LTOs
through 1985 due to the large number of LTOs of this model relative to
the other DC-10 models attributed to U.S. airlines and the U.S. domestic
orientation of the DC-10-10 over the international orientation of the
DC-10-30.
(2) DC-lO-20's will retain the same percentage of LTOs through
1985 since Northwest Airlines is the only airline using them domestically
at present (15 aircraft). This assumption follows the actual LTOs at
q in
ORD, LAX and JFK from 1972 (FAA-AASr and 1975 (GAG)"1" very closely,
however, DC-10-40 (DC-10-20) service began at JFK by Northwest subsequent
22
to 1972. Thus, some alterations can be expected but are difficult to
predict. Such changes are not expected to seriously effect the overall
analysis because the same size aircraft are being substituted.
(3) DC-10 and L1011 aircraft will remain with the airlines, relative
to type, as they stood in 1973. By this assumption, airlines that own
only DC-10-101s will continue to own only DC-10-10's and, similarly, for
airlines having the other two DC-101s and the L1011.
(4) Based upon assumtion 3 and the fact that individual airlines
fly more heavily into some airports and less heavily into others, the
ratio of DC-10 LTOs to L1011 LTOs at any specific airport will remain
reasonably the same based on 1973 and 1975 data for the specific airports.
(5) U.S. domestic AC (except for Northwest and National) will
continue to use DC-10-101s and foreign flag AC will continue to use DC-
10- 30' s.
-------
Two 1975 issues of the Official Airline Guide (OAG), the North
American edition for August 1, 1975, and the International Edition for
23
July, 1975, are used to determine the total scheduled LTOs at each
selected airport.
The three versions of the DC-10 are broken down by checking each
airline against the type of DC-101s included in its fleet. Most airlines
include only one type of DC-10. The exception is National Airlines
which has mostly DC-10-lO's with a few DC-10-30's (Jane's All the World's
9 24
Aircraft). ' The results are as follows for ORD, LAX and JFK:
Table 1-28
ORD LAX JFK
(DC-10)
LTD Ratio (L1011) 4.0 2.4 1.2
Fraction of DC-10 LTOs
performed by:
DC- 10-10
DC-10-20
DC-10-30
0.724
0.264
0.012
1.000
0.928
0.000
0.072
1.000
0.767
0.048
0.185
1.000
Utilizing these ratios to breakdown the percentages of DC-10/L1011
aircraft, the LTOs for the individual models are estimated for 1980 and
1985 by applying the resulting percentages to the total AC LTOs.
DC-8 STRETCHED: (includes DC-8-61 and DC-8-63) Due to the fact
that both versions use JT3D engines, no breakdown between the
versions was implemented.
-------
B707/DC8: (includes all models of B707, all models of standard
DCS, B720, CV880, CV990, Jetstar, and all other models of
standard body domestic and foreign built four-engine jets).
The aircraft LTOs involved in this category are summed and
then fractioned to obtain weighted percentages for each model
according to 1972 operations. All the aircraft included in
the 1972 weighting are out of production and decrease in
population forward from that time. The projection was further
adjusted by the following considerations:
(1) The JT4A and JT3C, as old turbojet engines, will drop out as
powerplants just before 1980, the presently foreseeable latest date
of implementation of noise standards. The aircraft powered by these
engines will be either converted to JT3D engines or will drop out completely
from U.S. service. The percentage of LTOs handled by these aircraft are
added to the JT3D-powered aircraft of the same model designation to
carry out the conceivable results of this transition.
(2) The CV880 contributed a significant number of LTOs by certifi-
cated route AC and the CV990 remained in service with a supplemental AC
in 1972 and 1973 (AAS),9'24 however, by June 1975 the CV880s were all
sold to foreign airlines or abandoned and only Modern Air Transport air-
line retained 9 CV990s for use in the U.S. with the remainder outside of
the U.S. Most of Modern's were out of service in 1972 therefore it is
reasonable to assume all CV880s and CV990s will be out of U.S. service
by 1980.25
-------
B727 SIR: (includes 727-200 and 727-300 or 7X7 jets) Adjustments
to this category are made in the 1980 and 1985 projections due
to the advent of the 7X7 in 1979 (estimated). The categorical
total of LTOs is found for each of these years from the Equip-
12 8
ment Forecast and the airport AC totals. The LTOs are
distributed by taking a ratio of the number of aircraft in the
AC fleet estimated by the FAA for 1980 and 1985 to arrive at
22
an estimate for each aircraft type. The results are:
Table 1-29
Number of Aircraft % of LTOs
1980
727-200 499 82%
7X7 (727-300) 110 18%
1985
727-200 499 50%
7X7 (727-300) 499 50%
B727-100: (includes all models of the 727-100) No adjustments are
necessary for this category and the percentages given for
operations are used.
DC9/B737: (includes all models of DC9, B737 and all foreign built,
twin-engine, standard body jets) The DC-9 remains in produc-
tion, while the B737 and BAC1-11 are not, in the 1975 to 1985
time frame. Particular airports are heavily weighted toward
either DC-9's or B737's for LTOs. The BAC-111 is projected
26
to drop out by 1981 according to the FAA. Other two engine
jets are projected to increase gradually from 1975 to 1986
-------
to take the place of the BAC-111. They are expected to be
equivalent in number by 1979 and growing at an accelerated
rate from 1980 to 1986. They are assumed to have the same
emission factors as the BAC-111 until 1979. For 1980 and
beyond the replacement aircraft are assumed to be VFW 614s,
the most likely aircraft to replace the BAC-111. Emissions
data are available for the RR M45H engine which powers the VFW
614 to permit calculations of probable emissions. Because the
two engine replacement fleet (VFW 614) is predicted to more
than double from 1980 to 1985, the LTOs are predicted to at
least double for the selected airports. For airports that do
not include BAC-111 LTOs or equivalent AC LTOs in 1972 and
1975, LTOs are not predicted for 1980 and 1985.
The proportion of DC-9's to B737's at each selected
airport is likely to be retained subject to changes to account
for the production of further DC-9's, therefore, the following
estimating scheme is used:
a) For 1975, the same relative percentage of LTOs are
applied as determined from 1972 baseline.
b) For 1980, the B737 and BAC-111 (VFW 614) LTOs are kept
constant and the residue applied to the DC-9. The DC-9 fleet
is expected to grow by 193 aircraft with the other fleets
1-20
remaining static in number.
-------
c) For 1985, the VFW 614 LTOs are expected to double the
percentage determined for 1980. Then for the remainder:
(1) If the categorical percentage is equal or decreasing
from 1980 (LAX), retain the DC-9 LTOs constant with the
residue B737 LTOs.
(2) If the categorical percentage is increasing (ORD, JFK),
retain the B737 LTOs constant with the residue DC-9 LTOs.
Turboprop: (includes all turboprop aircraft models) In 1972 turbo-
props constituted a small percentage of certificated route air
carrier operations but a more significant percentage of
supplemental operations. The weighted percentages for each
type of turboprop aircraft in AC use is carried through for
1974 and future years until turboprops are phased out of AC
fleets at the selected airports as shown in the FAA Equipment
12
Forecast. Supplemental fleet airlines are replacing turbo-
props with turbojets as they become available. Although
present predictions by the FAA indicate the phase out of AC
turboprops, new turboprop aircraft for AC use may be developed
to take advantage of potentially superior fuel economy.
Piston: (includes all piston engine aircraft models) No AC air-
craft are found in this category for ORD, LAX, or JFK, there-
fore no estimations or further determinations are formulated.
-------
Helicopter: (includes all helicopter models) These aircraft
are excluded from this study as noted above.
Tables 1-30, 1-31 and 1-32 summarize the estimated AC LTOs for
1975, 1980 and 1985 at the selected airports.
-------
Table 1-30
1975 Air Carrier LTOs for Selected Airports
Aircraft Type
BAC111-200
-400
B727-100
B727-200 (STR)
DC-10-10
DC-10-20
DC-10-30
B707-100B
-300B
-300C
DC-8-50/62
B720B
DC-8-10/20/30
B707-300
DC-8-61/63
B747
DC-9-10/30
B737-200
B720
L1011
CV880
VC10
CV990
F-27
L-100-30
L-188
Jetstar
FH-227
DTO-6
CVS 80
(Engines)
(2RR-Spey-MK511)
(3JT3D)
(3CF6-6D)
(3JT9D)
(3CF6-50)
(4JT3D)
(4JT4A)
(4JT3D)
(4JT9D)
(2JT8D)
(4JT3C)
(3RR-RB211)
(4CF805-3B)
(4KB. Conway)
(4CJ805-23B)
(2RR-Dart 6-514)
(4 All 501-D22A)
(4 All 501-D13)
(4TFE-731)
(2RR Dart 7-532)
(2PT6A-27)
(2 All 501-D13)
JFK
5457
22330
15950
6007
0
1449
38866
8187
4785
20735
15211
67
385
6524
1460
1749
393
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
LAX
0
20130
42090
17984
0
1396
37859
t
5309
3660
12810
8876
20405
1616
8071
586
202
198
856
423
551
0
0
0
0
ORD
567
59700
53730
15560
5674
258
27193
5662
8955
10448
68088
1225
5373
7564
4
138
1
1090
923
4
7788
3
17063
-------
Table 1-31
1980 Air Carrier LTOs for Selected Airports
Aircraft Type
BAC111
VFW614
B727-100
B727-200
B7X7
DC-10-10
DC-10-10
DC-10-20(40)
DC-10-20(40)
DC-10-30
DC-10-30
B707 '
B720B
DC-8
B747
B747
DC9
B737-
L1011
L1011
Jetstar
VC10
>e (Engines)
(2RR-Spey-MK511)
(2RR M45H)
(3JT8D)
(3JT8D)
(3CFM56)
(3CF6-6D)
(12.5% " Retro'd)
i (3JT9D)
(12.5% " Retro'd)
(3CF6-50)
(12.5% " Retro'd)
JFK
4775
682
17750
21833
4793
9744
1392
610
87
2350
336
LAX
0
0
8177
50697
18706
24708
3530
0
0
1917
274
(4JT3D Smokeless) 39050 36486
(4JT9D) 24850 16971
(12.5% " Retro'd) 3550 2425
(2JT8D) 22876 20537
(2JT8D) 67 20405
(3RR-RB211) 10593 11088
(12.5% " Retro'd) 1513 1584
(4TFE731-3 Old) 0 0
(PR Conway) 0 145
ORD
0
567
31501
74456
15403
24935
3562
9092
1299
414
59
29515
14350
2050
97836
8610
1230
5
0
-------
Table 1-32
1985 Air Carrier LTOs for Selected Airports
Aircraft Type
VFW614
VFW614
B727-100
B7 27-200
B7X7
DC-10-10
DC-10-20(40)
DC-10-30
B707
B720B
DC-8
B747
B747
DC- 9
DC-9
B737
L1011
Jetstar
VC10
(Engines)
(2RR M45H Old)
(2RR M45H New)
(3JT8D)
(3JT8D)
(3CFM56)
(3CF6-6D)
(All Retro 'd)
(3JT9D)
(All Retro'd)
(3 CF6-50)
(All Retro'd)
(4JT3D Smokeless)
(4JT9D Retro'd)
(4JT9D New)
(2JT8D Retro'd)
(2JT8D New)
(2JT8D Old)
(3RR RB211)
(Retro'd & New)
(4TFE731-3 Old)
(RR Conway)
JFK
5985
5985
7980
19950
19950
16694
1045
4027
23940
25552
14348
20970
2903
67
18135
0
0
LAX
0
0
2338
39747
37655
36280
0
2815
17650
18441
10355
18542
2567
18761
16281
0
70
ORD
1826
1825
9321
61521
54368
36261
13222
601
13178
16881
9479
69872
9673
20776
12521
1
0
-------
Air Taxi (AT) and General Aviation (GA)
The same fleet mix is carried from 1972 to 1985 in these groupings
except for some attrition such as the CV 580's being phased out before
1980. Helicopter percentages of LTOs are carried through in determining
the LTOs of the other aircraft. The same fleet mix is assumed because:
1) The distances traversed by AT will be the same and the aircraft
fleet extant is highly fuel efficient over these routes;
2) GA falls to a minor contribution at LAX and is neglible at ORD
and JFK by 1980;
3) Large AT aircraft are likely to be used to accomodate increasing
passenger loads, but no estimates of the expected effect have been
obtained.
4) No other projection data has been obtained for the selected
(AC) airports far GA and AT.
Tables 1-33 and 1-34 summarize the estimated GA engine LTO's for
the selected AC airports.
-------
Table 1-33
1975 Estimated Engine LTO's for
General Aviation at Selected Commercial Airports
Engine Type
CF700
CF610
JT12
JT15D
SPEY MK511
TFE 731
PT6A-27
TPE 331
VIPER 601
ALLISON 501-D13
DART 7-532
TCM TSIO-520
TCM 10-520
JFK
772
2195
0
447
252
479
2184
1716
650
101
428
3900
938
LAX
8754
12644
0
0
7173
7054
7125
0
0
0
0
4275
238
ORD
4266
5996
4932
2306
0
0
7000
0
0
0
0
10500
0
Engine Type
CF700
CJ610
SPEY MK511
TFE731
PT6A-27
TCM TSIO-520
TCM 10-520
Table 1-34
1980 and 1985 Estimated Engine LTO's
for General Aviation at LAX
1980
1659
2396
1359
1337
1350
810
45
1985
184
266
152
148
150
90
5
-------
Tables 1-35, 1-36, and 1-37 summarize the estimated AT LTO's
at the selected airports.
Table 1-35
1975 Estimated Air Taxi LTO's
for Selected Commercial Airports
Aircraft Type
DeHavilland Twin Otter
SB&H Sky Liner
Convair 580
Beechcraft 99
Swearingen Metro
Cessna 402
Piper Navaho
General Prop A/C
Helicopter
JFK
4759
1984
1194
217
7346
LAX
16327
1745
510
ORD
540
11337
14396
1708
2519
9418
Table 1-36
1980 Estimated Air Taxi LTO's
for Selected Commercial Airports
Aircraft Type
DeHavilland Twin Otter
SB&H Skyliner
Convair 580
Beechcraft 99
Swearingen Metro
Cessna 402
Piper Navaho
General Prop A/C
Helicopter
JFK
5373
2240
1593
8294
LAX
21380
2286
ORD
699
14682
18644
2212
3263
12334
-------
Table 1-37
1985 Estimated Air Taxi LTO's
for Selected Commercial Airports
Aircraft Type
DeHavilland Twin Otter
SB&H Skyliner
Convair 580
Beechcraft 99
Swearingen Metro
Cessna 402
Piper Navaho
General Prop A/C
Helicopter
JFK
6140
2560
1820
9480
LAX
28507
3048
ORD
929
19514
24780
2940
4330
16445
Tables 1-38, 1-39, and 1-40 summarize estimated auxiliary power
unit emissions at the selected aiports. APU'a meeting 1979 standards
are not assumed installed in aircraft with retrofitted engines in 1980.
Table 1-38
1975 Estimated Auxiliary Power Unit
Use (LTO's) at Selected Commercial Airports
Aircraft
APU
JFK
LAX
ORD
BAC111
B727
DC-10
B747
DC-9
L1011
B737
L188
GTCP85-115
GTCP85-98
TSCP700-4
GTCP660-4
GTCP85-98
ST6C
GTCP85-129
GTC85-90
5457
38280
7456
20735
15211
6524
67
62220
19380
12810
8876
8071
20405
551
567
113430
21492
10448
47312
5373
20776
923
GTCP85-98 Data
-------
Table 1-39
1980 Estimated Auxiliary Power Unit
Use (LTO's) at Selected Commercial Airports
Aircraft
BAC11KVFW614)
B727
DC-10
B747
DC-9
L1011
B737
B7X7
*New (>1979)
APU JFK
GTCP85-115(-98*) 5457
GTCP85-98 39583
TSCP700-4 14519
GTCP660-4 28400
GTCP85-98 22876
ST6C 12106
GTCP85-129 67
GTCP85-98* 4793
LAX
58875
30429
19395
20537
12672
20405
18706
ORD
567
105957
39360
16400
77061
9840
20776
15403
Table 1-40
1985 Estimated Auxiliary Power Unit
Use (LTO's) at Selected Commercial Airports
Aircraft
APU
JFK
VFW614 (N)
B727 (0)
DC-10 (0)
DC-10 (N)
B747 (0)
B747 (N)
DC-9 (0)
DC-9 (N)
L1011 (0)
L1011 (N)
B737 (0)
B7X7 (N)
(0) < 1979
(N) > 1979
GTCP85-98
GTCP85-98
TSCP700-4
TSCP700-4
GTCP660-4
GTCP660-4
GTCP85-98
GTCP85-98
ST6C
ST6C
GTCP85-129
GTCP85-98
11970
27930
14519
7247
25552
14348
20970
2903
12106
6029
67
19950
LAX
42085
36280
2815
18441
10355
18527
2567
11426
4855
18761
37655
OBD
3652
70843
39360
10724
16881
9479
69872
9673
9840
2681
21776
54368
-------
The estimated AC emissions are broken down in detail for each of
the selected airports in Tables for 1975, 1980 and 1985. Tables 1-41,
1-42, and 1-43 summarize JFK; Tables 1-44, 1-45, and 1-46 summarize LAX;
and Tables 1-47, 1-48, and 1-49 summarize ORD.
Table 1-41
1975 Estimated Air Carrier Emissions for JFK
Aircraft Type
BAC111
B727
DC-10-10
-20(40)
-30
B707
B720B
DC-8
B747
DC-9
B737
B720
L1011
CVS 80
CV990
VC9
VC10
HC
375,442
769,428
382,045
0
98,242
13,364,535
2,073,500
204,725
38,500
412,969
83,512
21,536
339,306
CO
375,442
3,227,004
883,029
0
248,648
15,531,829
5,921,916
858,624
84,392
1,143,005
217,248
56,120
477,827
NOx
92,769
1,251,756
374,837
0
140,843
1,365,264
2,189,616
333,060
9,548
387,526
35,040
9,118
92,347
-------
Table 1-42
1980 Estimated Air Carrier Emissions for JFK
Aircraft
VFW614
B727
B7X7
Type
(0)
(N)
(S)
(N)
DC-10-10 (0)
-10 (R)
-20(40) (0)
-20 (R)
-30 (0)
-30 (R)
B707
B720B
DC-8
B747
DC-9
B737
L1011
(S)
(0)
(R)
(S)
(0)
(R)
HP-
67,805
1,719
795,618
17,111
619,718
13,447
45,750
1,122
159,330
3,871
5,373,280
2,485,000
61,060
307,436
670,537
12,845
CO
342,845
10,094
3,336,847
145,228
1,432,368
71,827
130,662
6,055
403,260
20,765
7,575,700
7,097,160
329,440
1,289,397
1,855,894
68,993
NOx
22,252
3,178
1,294,364
89,150
608,026
45,701
43,013
3,732
228,420
12,499
1,462,032
2,624,160
203,060
500,157
629,224
41,759
(0) < 1979
(N) > 1979
(R) Retrofitted > 1979
(S) Smokeless (JT8D, JT3D)
-------
Table 1-43
1985 Estimated Air Carrier Emissions for JFK
Aircraft
VFW 614
B727
B7X7
Type
(0)
(N)
(S)
(N)
DC-10-10 (R)
-20(40)(R)
-30 (R)
B707
B720B
DC-8
B747
DC-9
B737
L1011
(S)
(R)
(N)
(S)
(N)
(S)
(R)
HC
84,987
15,082
561,393
71,222
161,264
13,481
46,391
3,294,144
439,494
253,673
280,998
9,232
898
153,966
CO
429,723
88,578
2,354,499
604,485
861,410
72,732
248,869
4,644,360
2,371,226
1,377,408
1,178,514
49,351
3,765
826,956
NOx
27,890
27,890
913,311
371,070
515,845
44,831
149,804
896,314
1,461,574
826,445
457,146
30,772
1,461
500,526
(0) < 1979
(N) > 1979
(R) Retrofitted > 1979
(S) Smokeless (JT8D, JT3D)
-------
Table 1-44
1975 Estimated Air Carrier Emissions for LAX
Aircraft Type
B727
DC-10-10
-30
B707
B720B
DC-8
B747
DC-9
B737
B720
L1011
CV880
CV990
VC10
F27
L-100
L-188
HC
853,036
773,672
64,179
8,110,153
872,617
267,619
110,341
358,573
22,800
7,355
26,550
2,602
4,670
5,775
CO
3,682,802
1,802,537
163,692
9,735,825
2,509,735
1,155,389
245,762
1,051,021
62,251
20,124
38,350
2,517
4,518
13,026
NOx
1,907,665
108,356
132,838
1,149.197
1,279,975
598,483
36,845
473,335
13,467
4,345
10,051
1,952
3,502
4,893
-------
Table 1-45
1980 Estimated Air Carrier Emissions for LAX
Aircraft
B727
B7X7
DC-10-10
DC-10-30
B707
B720B
DC-8
B747
DC-9
B737
L1011
VC10
Type
(S)
(N)
(0)
(R)
(0)
(R)
(S)
(0)
(R)
(S)
(0)
(R)
(0)
HC
807,170
46,521
1,062,938
23,083
88,163
2,146
3,410,712
1,156,031
28,803
374,205
492,618
9,371
19,040
CO
3,484,782
412,120
2,476,483
132,462
224,864
11,558
4,924,151
3,324,861
154,198
1,615,552
1,443,925
50,485
27,501
NOx
1,805,092
324,859
1,488,410
105,038
182,479
9,692
1,290,145
1,695,693
126,268
836,845
650,282
41,927
7,208
(0) < 1979
(N) > 1979
(R) Retrofitted > 1979
(S) Smokeless (JT8D, JT3D)
-------
Table 1-46
1985 Estimated Air Carrier Emissions for LAX
Aircraft
B727
B7X7
DC-10-10
-30
B707
B720B
DC-8
B747
DC- 9
B737
L1011
VC10
Type
(S)
(N)
(R)
(R)
(S)
(R)
(N)
(S)
(N)
(S)
(R)
(0)
HC
576,986
93,648
237,271
22,042
1,649,876
219,073
127,154
169,474
5,689
171,476
96,316
9,223
CO
2,491,011
829,615
1,278,870
118,737
2,381,977
1,172,816
681,326
731,668
30,958
740,309
518,892
13,323
NOx
1,290,326
653,955
1,079,693
99,567
624,087
960,381
547,132
378,999
24,751
383,475
430,929
3,492
(0) < 1979
(N) > 1979
(R) Retrofitted > 1979
(S) Smokeless (JT8D, JT3D)
-------
Table 1-47
1975 Estimated Air Carrier Emissions for ORD
Aircraft Type
BAC111
B727
DC-10-10
-20 (40)
-30
B707
B720B
DC-8
B747
DC-9
B737
B720
L1011
CV880
CV990
C580
VC10
L-100
L-188
F27
F227
DTO
Jetstar
HC
30,312
1,766,105
765,085
330,738
13,561
8,315,230
811,980
706,749
95,266
268,865
335,842
5,862
101,693
602
6,864
10,996
30,856
30
CO
31,095
7,564,647
1,776,641
948,466
34,466
9,850,344
2,328,539
3,027,171
210,859
772,262
900,721
15,754
228,297
861
6,472
24,686
29,148
80
NOx
9,503
3,545,822
944,337
432,359
24,714
1,049,665
1,061,466
1,418,944
28,605
316,255
176,393
3,080
78,829
203
4,620
8,524
20,875
25
-------
Table 1-48
1980 Estimated Air Carrier Emissions for ORD
Aircraft Type
VFW614 (0)
B727 (S)
B7X7 (N)
DC-10-10 (0)
(R)
-20(40) (0)
(R)
-30 (0)
(R)
B707
B720B (S)
DC-8
B747 (0)
(R)
DC9 ,..
B737 * '
L1011 (0)
(R)
HC
6,362
1,649,751
43,899
1,226,030
26,609
529,973
13,133
21,734
528
3,150,968
1,115,282
27,634
1,015,538
430,845
8,222
CO
32,774
7,066,273
785,091
2,847,021
143,086
1,519,819
70,536
55 , 240
2,836
4,505,094
3,198,328
148,420
4,349,790
1,237,516
44,266
NOx
2,506
3,312,216
378,452
1,513,275
107,181
692,811
52,181
39,609
2,117
1,062,286
1,457,960
109,798
2,038,902
506,785
32,959
Jetstar (R)
34
90
28
(0) < 1979
(N) > 1979
(R) Retrofitted > 1979
(S) Smokeless (JT8D, JT3D)
-------
Table 1-49
1985 Estimated Air Carrier Emissions for ORD
Aircraft
VFW614
B727
B7X7
Type
(0)
(N)
(S)
(N)
DC-10-10 (R)
-10(40) (R)
-30 (R)
B707
B720B
DC-8
B747
DC-9
B737
L1011
Jet star
(S)
(R)
(N)
(S)
(N)
(S)
(R)
(N)
HC
10,244
1,836
1,103,018
153,316
270,870
133,675
5,373
1,406,884
227,556
131,569
725,272
24,220
215,650
83,691
4
CO
52,772
10,848
4,724,487
1,330,916
1,456,605
717,955
28,884
2,011,490
1,222,185
709,029
3,106,509
130,966
923,679
450,606
10
NOx
4,036
4,041
2,214,537
965,567
1,091,094
531,128
21,564
474,303
904,147
514,141
1,456,133
96,029
432,962
335,513
3
(0) < 1979
(N) > 1979
(r) Retrofitted > 1979
(S) Smokeless (JT8D, JT3D)
-------
Tables 1-50, 1-51, and 1-52 summarize AT, GA and APU emissions at
JFK for 1975, 1980 and 1985; Tables 1-53, 1-54 and 1-55 summarize AT, GA
*
and APU emissions at LAX; and, Tables 1-56, 1-57 and 1-58 summarize AT.
GA and APU emissions at ORD.
Table 1-50
Estimated Air Taxi Emissions for JFK
Aircraft Type HC CO NOx
1975
Beechcraft 99 10,317 7,341 1,389
DeHavilland Twin Otter 24,747 35,217 3,331
Piper Navaho 3,810 64,059 310
1980
Beechcraft 99 11,648 16,576 1,568
DeHavilland Twin Otter 27,940 39,760 3,762
Piper Navaho 4,301 72,322 350
1985
Beechcraft 99 9,984 14,208 1,344
Beechcraft 99 (N) 550 2,982 845
DeHavilland Twin Otter 23,946 34,077 3,224
DeHavilland Twin Otter (N) 1,320 7,153 2,026
Piper Navaho 4,914 82,628 400
(N) 25% New Aircraft that meet 1979 Standards
-------
Table 1-51
Estimated General Aviation Emissions for JFK
Engine Type HC CO NOx
1975
Dart 7-532 1113 984 599
Allison 501-D13 384 859 253
Spey 511 8669 8669 2142
TFE 731-2 1150 2970 766
JT15D 1743 4559 492
CJ610 10975 111945 1800
CF700 3397 33968 718
Viper 601 2860 28600 605
TPE331 8752 6864 1098
PT6A-27 5678 8081 764
TCM TSIO-520 5265 88530 429
TCM 10-520 1097 25138 64
1980 & 1985
General Aviation operations assumed negligible.
-------
Table 1-52
Estimated Auxiliary Power Unit Emissions for JFK
Aircraft Type
1975
BAG 111
B727
DC-10
B747
DC-9
L1011
B737
1980
VFW614
B727
DC-10
B747
DC-9
L1011
B737
B7X7
1985
VFW614
B727
DC10
DC10
B747
B747
DC9
DC 9
L1011
L1011
B737
B7X7
(0) < 1979
(N) > 1979
(0)
(P)
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
(N)
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
(N)
(N)
(0)
(0)
(N)
(0)
(N)
(0)
(N)
(0)
(N)
(0)
(N)
HC
65
2,552
1,939
14,929
1,014
7,209
5
291
2,639
3,775
20,448
1,525
13,377
5
256
638
1,862
3,775
1,413
18,397
8,609
1,398
155
13,377
1,306
5
1,064
CO
10,405
97,333
9,854
590,948
38,677
39,296
211
10,186
100,646
19,189
809,400
58,166
72,918
211
8,947
22,344
71,017
19,189
8,636
728,232
258,264
53,320
5,419
72,918
7,838
211
37,240
NOx
11,940
88,299
73,342
363,277
35,087
56,541
135
6,112
91,305
142,819
497,568
52,767
104,919
135
5,368
13,406
64,425
142,819
35,329
447,671
154,958
48,371
3,251
104,919
32,135
135
22,344
-------
Table 1-53
Estimated Air Taxi Emissions for LAX
HC CO NOx
DeHavilland Twin Otter 58,124 84,900 9,992
SB&H Skyliner 11,932 13,747 2,034
CV580 2,670 6,022 2,262
1980
DeHavilland Twin Otter 76,113 111,176 13,085
SB&H Skyliner 15,636 18,014 2,665
1985
DeHavilland Twin Otter 76,113 111,176 13,085
DeHavilland Twin Otter (N) 4,305 23,519 7,811
SB&H Skyliner 15,636 18,014 2,665
SB&H Skyliner (N) 453 2,527 888
(N) 25% New aircraft that meet 1979 standards.
-------
Table 1-54
Estimated General Aviation Emissions for LAX
Engine Type
1975
CJ610
Spey 511
TFE731
CF700
PT6A-27
TCM TSIO-520
TCM 10-520
1980
CJ610
Spey 511
TFE731
CF700
PT6A-27
TCM TSIO-520
TCM 10-520
1985
CJ610
Spey 511
TFE731
CF700
PT6A-27
TCM TSIO-520
TCM 10-520
HC
43,495
168,004
11,498
26,350
12,683
4,157
202
8,242
31,835
2,180
4,994
2,403
788
38
915
3,561
241
554
267
88
4
CO
480,725
175,069
31,249
281,266
18,525
82,337
5,805
91,096
33,173
5,923
53,304
3,510
15,601
1,098
10,052
3,710
656
5,912
390
1,733
122
NOx
9,458
59,800
10,863
7,485
2,180
457
15
1,792
11,332
2,059
1,419
413
87
3
199
1,267
228
157
46
10
0
-------
Table 1-55
Estimated Auxiliary Power Unit Emissions for LAX
HC CO NOx
B727 (0) 4,148 158,205 143,521
DC-10 (0) 5,039 25,613 190,630
B747 (0) 9,223 365,085 224,431
DC-9 (0) 592 22,568 20,473
L1011 (0) 8,918 48,612 69,945
B737 (0) 1,497 64,288 41,245
L188 (0) 37 1,401 1,271
1980
B727 (0) 3,925 149,698 135,804
DC-10 (0) 7,912 40,217 299,315
B747 (0) 13,965 552,758 339,801
DC-9 (0) 1,369 52,219 47,372
L0100 (0) 14,002 76,325 109,820
B737 (0) 1,497 64,288 41,245
7X7 (N) 998 34,917 20,950
1985
B727 (0) 2,806 107,008 97,076
DC-10 (0) 9,433 47,950 356,875
DC-10 (N) 549 3,355 13,723
B747 (0) 13,277 525,555 323,078
B747 (N) 6,213 186,381 111,829
DC-9 (0) 1,236 47,146 42,770
DC-9 (N) 137 4,792 2,875
L1011 (0) 12,625 68,820 99,021
L1011 (N) 1,052 6,312 25,877
B737 (0) 1,376 59,110 37,922
7X7 (N) 2,009 70,290 42,174
(0) < 1979
(N) > 1979
-------
Table 1-56
Estimated Air Taxi Emissions for ORD
Aircraft Type HC CO NOx
1975
Beechcraft 99 46,029 66,208 7,211
Swearingen Metro 112,577 89,543 17,275
DeHavilland Twin Otter 2,192 3,154 343
Cessna 402 1,172 21,922 117
General Prop A/C 19,699 15,668 3,023
1980
Beechcraft 99 59,609 85,743 9,337
Swearingen Metro 145,796 115,966 22,372
DeHavilland Twin Otter 2,838 4,082 445
Cessna 402 4,789 89,595 477
General Prop A/C 25,517 20,296 3,916
1985
Beechcraft 99 59,609 85,743 9,337
Beechcraft 99 (N) 3,284 17,878 5,624
Swearingen Metro 145,796 115,959 22,371
Swearingen Metro (N) 4,172 23,094 7,363
DeHavilland Twin Otter 2,838 4,082 445
DeHavilland Twin Otter (N) 156 851 268
Cessna 402 4,210 78,756 419
General Prop A/C 25,517 20,303 3,917
General Prop A/C (N) 731 4,044 1,289
(N) 25% new aircraft that meet 1979 standards.
-------
Table 1-57
Estimated General Aviation Emissions for ORD
Engine Type
1975
CF700
CJ610
JT12
JT15D
PT6A-27
TCM TSIO-520
JTC
14,590
23,396
19,245
7,056
14,210
11,393
CO
152,254
251,652
206,996
18,736
20,440
213,129
NOx
3,737
4,623
3,803
2,306
2,226
1,134
1980 & 1985
General aviation operations assumed neglible.
-------
Table 1-58
Estimated Auxiliary Power Unit Emissions for ORD
Aircraft Type HC CO NOx
1975
BAC111 (0) 7 1,081 1,241
B727 (0) 7,562 288,415 261,645
DC-10 (0) 5,588 28,406 211,410
B747 (0) 7,522 297,754 183,040
DC-9 (0) 3,154 120,300 109,134
L1011 (0) 5,937 32,364 46,566
B737 (0) 1,524 65,457 41,994
L188 (0) 62 2,346 2,128
1980
BAC111 (0) 7 1,081 1,241
B727 (0) 7,064 269,414 244,408
DC-10 (0) 10,234 52,021 387,171
B747 (0) 11,808 467,400 287,328
DC-9 (0) 5,138 195,939 177,753
L1011 (0) 10,873 59,270 85,280
B737 (0) 1,524 65,457 41,994
B7X7 (N) 822 28,753 17,252
1985
VFW614 (N) 22 3,481 3,994
B727 (0) 4,723 180,129 163,410
DC-10 (0) 10,234 52,021 387,171
DC-10 (N) 2,091 12,780 52,280
B747 (0) 12,155 481,109 295,755
B747 (N) 5,688 170,622 102,373
DC-9 (0) 4,658 177,661 161,171
DC-9 (N) 516 18,056 10,833
L1011 (0) 10,873 59,270 85,280
L1011 (N) 581 3,486 14,290
B737 (0) 1,524 64,457 41,994
B7X7 (N) 2,900 101,486 60,892
(0) < 1979
(N) > 1979
-------
The total summations for AC, AT, GA and APU for each year studied
are combined to produce Tables 1, 2, 3 and 4 in the discussion section
of this study above and Tables 1-59 through 1-61 as follows:
-------
Table 1-59
Estimated Total Aircraft Emissions at JFK
Ibe/yr
x 10 * BC
AC 21,117
AT 36
GA 82
APU 19
Total x 10"3
(Iba/yr) 21,254
i 2000
(T/yr) 10,627
r 365
(T/DA) 29.1
* 7.2 .
(T/4A/MT) 4.0
Ib./^
x 10 J BC
AC 10,643
AT 44
GA
APU 42
Total x 10~3
(Ibs/yr) 10,729
* 2000
(T/yr) 5,365
r 365
(T/DA) 14.7
T 7.2 .
(T/DA/aO 2.0
CT 1972
X CO X NOx X
99.35 30.233 96.26 5,686 91.90
0.17 104 0.33 5 0.08
0.39 413 1.32 20 0.32
0.09 657 2.09 476 7.70
100 31,407 100 6,187 100
15,704 3,094
43.0 8.5
6.0 1.1
V
FT 1980
X CO X NOx X
99.20 24,159 95.23 7,825 89.61
0.41 129 0.51 6 0.07
_
0.39 1,080 4.26 901 10.32
100 25,368 100 8,732 100
12,684 4,366
34.8 12.0
4.8 1.7
FY 1975 .
HC X CO X
18,164 99.35 29,025 95.98
39 0.22 107 0.36
51 0.28 321 1.06
28 0.15 787 2.60
18,282 100 30,240 100
9,141 15,120
25.0 41.4
3.5 5.8
FY 1985
BC X CO X
5,390 98.30 15,131 91.39
41 0.75 141 0.85
_ _
52 0.95 1,285 7.76
5.483 100 16,557 100
2,742 8.279
7.5 22.7
1.0 3.2
NOx X
6.282 90.70
5 0.07
10 0.15
629 9.08
6.926 100
3.463
9.5
1.3
HOx X
6.237 85.26
8 0.11
-
1,070 14.63
7.315 100
3.658
10.0
1.4
-------
Table 1-60
Estimated Total Aircraft Enlasiona at LAX
Iba/n
x 10 BC
AC 14.792
AT 65
GA 314
APU 17
Total x 10~3
(Iba/jrr) 15,188
r 2000
(T/yr) 7,594
i 365
(T/DA) 20.8
; 3.9 5.3
x 10 3 BC
AC 7.521
AT 92
GA 50
APU 44
local x 10~3
(Ibc/ytf) 7.707
; 2000
(T/yr) 3,854
» 365
(T/DA) 10.6
r 3.9 1 ,
(T/DAiaO 2.7
CT 1972
Z CO Z
97.39 23,128 92.18
0.43 94 0.37
2.07 1,269 5.06
0.11 600 2.39
100 25,091 100
12,546
34.4
8.8
FY 1980
Z CO Z
97.59 18,283 93.33
1.19 129 0.66
0.65 204 1.04
0.57 970 4.95
100 19,586 100
9.793
26.8
6.9
NOx Z
5,938 90.84
13 0.20
107 1.63
479 7.33
6.537 100
3,269
9.0
2.3
NOx Z
8.564 89.29
16 0.17
17 0.18
994 10.36
9.591 100
4,796
13.1
3.4
FY 1973
BC Z CO Z
11,478 96.89 20.485 91.65
73 0.62 105 0.47
266 2.25 1,075 4.81
29 0.24 686 3.07
11,846 100 22,351 100
5,923 11,176
16.2 30.6
4.2 7.9
n 1985
BC Z CO Z
3,378 93.64 10,990 89.39
97 2.75 155 1.26
6 0.17 23 0.18
51 1.44 1,127 9.17
3,532 100 12,295 100
1.766 6,148
4.8 16.8
1.2 4.3
NOx
6,698
14
90
692
7.494
3,747
10.3
2.6
NOx
6,477
24
2
1.153
7,636
3.828
10.5
2.7
Z
89.38
0.18
1.20
9.23
100
Z
84.60
0.31
0.03
15.06
100
-------
Table 1-61
Estimated Total Aircraft Emissions at ORD
ib«/z5
x 10 J. HC
AC 17,397
AT 137
CA 90
APU 21
Total x 10"3
(Ibs/yr) 17,645
T 2000
(T/yr) 8,823
T 365
(T/DA) 24.2
* 6.7 ,
(T/DA/«1*) 3.6
lbB/Q
x 10 J HC
AC 9.267
AT 239
GA
APU 47
Total x 10"3
(lb./rr) 9,553
T 2000
(T/yr) 4,777
T 363
(T/DA) 13.1
* 6.7 ,
(T/OA/*1*) 2.0
CY 1972
X CO X
98.59 30,163 94.09
0.78 181 0.56
0.51 988 3.08
0.12 727 2.27
100 32,059 100
16,030
43.9
6.6
7X 1980
X "" "55 X
97.01 26.006 94.70
2.50 316 1.15
-
0.49 1,139 4.15
100 27,461 100
13.731
37.6
5.6
HOx X
8,012 92.19
21 0.24
20 0.23
638 7.34
8,691 100
4,346
11.9
1.8
HOx X
11,309 89.84
37 0.29
-
1,242 9.87
12.588 100
6,294
17.2
2.6
FT 1<>75
HC X CO X
13,597 97.82 27,751 93.61
182 1.31 196 0.66
90 0.65 863 2.91
31 0.22 836 2.82
13,900 100 29,646 100
6,950 14,823
19.0 40.6
2.8 6.1
FT 1985
EC X' CO X
4,493 93.70 16.877 90.96
246 5.13 351 1.89
_
56 1.17 1,326 7.15
4,795 100 18,554 100
2.398 9,277
6.6 25.4
1.0 3.8
NOx X
9.124 90.99
28 0.28
18 0.18
857 8.55
10,027 100
5,014
13.7
2.1
NOx X
9,045 86.35
51 0.49
-
1,379 13.16
10,475 100
5.238
14.3
2.1
-------
PART II
Methodology for Computation of Aircraft Emissions
at Airports with High Levels of General Aviation Operations
Table II-l lists the predominantly general aviation (GA) activity
airports selected for estimation of GA emissions and their significance
to the surrounding communities.
Table II-l
27
General Aviation (GA) Airports Selected for Study
Airport
Van Nuys
Tamiami
Phoenix
Fairbanks
San Jose Municipal
San Jose Reid Hillview
Total
Code
(VNY)
(TMB)
(PHX)
(FAI)
(SJC) ,
(RHV) '
Operations
%GA U.
99.4
99.6
74.8
70.9
91 7 (
7 J. / X
S. Rank
3
31
9
133
10
28
Both San Jose airports are located within the city limit of San Jose and
are combined to provide a city wide sample. Van Nuys has the largest
total number of GA operations in the U.S. in 1974 and is located in the
Los Angeles basin. Phoenix and Tamiami are selected for high GA usage
in urban areas with hot sunny climates. Fairbanks is selected as a
small community with extremely high GA activity for the community size
and severe temperature inversions. Table II-2 presents the breakdown of
operations for the above airports in detail, the data being obtained
from the FAA Air Traffic Activity for CY 1974,. Table 4.27
-------
Table II-2
CY1974 Total Operations for Selected GA Airports
Operations
Total
Military
GA & Local
AT
AC
SJC&RHV
718,100
1,462
(0.02%)
658,207
(91.7%)
8,227
(1.15%)
50,204
(6.99%)
PHX
417,998
10,064
(2.4%)
312,682
(74.8%)
9,010
(2.2%)
86,242
(20.6%)
VNY
586,680
3,627
(0.6%)
582,959
(99.4%)
85
(0.001%)
9
(0.001%)
TMB
290,147
1,168
(0.4%)
288,979
(99.6%)
0
0
FAI
166,029
2,051
(1.2%)
117,738
(70.9%)
30,174
(18.2%)
16,066
(9.7%)
The number of active GA aircraft in each U.S. county is listed in
Table 23 of the FAA Census of U.S. Civil Aircraft for CY1973 and is
broken down according to number and type of engines. Table II-3
presents the percentages of each type of GA aircraft according to number
and type of engine for each of the above selected airports. The percentage
breakdown of GA aircraft operations at each airport selected is assumed
to be the same as the percentage breakdown of active GA aircraft in the
surrounding county. This assumption appears reasonable for airports
that are substantially devoted to GA activity. Applying these percentages
to the GA and local operations from Table II-2 and dividing by two, the
number of LTOs for each type of aircraft are obtained and shown in Table
11-4.
-------
Table II-3
CY1973 Percent Active GA Aircraft by Engine
Type and Number for Selected GA Airports
Engine
Number
Single
Twin
3 +
Single
Twin
4 +
Single
Twin
3 +
Rotorcraf t
Type
Piston
Piston
Turboprop
Turboprop
Turboprop
Turboprop
Turbojet
Turbojet
Turbojet
SJC&RHV
88.1
9.4
0.08
0
0.3
0
0
0.3
0
1.7
PHX
80.6
12.0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0
0.3
0
5.5
7
,2
,7
,1
.4
2
,2
VNY
80.
11.
0.
0
0.9
0.09
0.07
0.8
0.2
6.1
TMB
66.8
24.6
2.3
0
1.6
0.
0.
0.6
0.6
2.8
,7
.1
FAI
92.3
3.9
0.7
0.4
0
0.3
0
0
0
2.4
Engine
Number
Single
Twin
3 +
Single
Twin
4 +
Single
Twin
3 +
Rotorcraft
Table II-4
CY1974 Number of GA Aircraft LTOs by Engine
Type and Number for
Type SJC&RHV
Piston 289,940
Piston 30,936
Piston 263
Turboprop 0
Turboprop 987
Turboprop 0
Turbojet 0
Turbojet 987
Turbojet 0
5,595
Selected
PHX
126,011
18,761
1,094
313
1,094
156
0
469
0
8,599
GA Airports
VNY
234,350
32,646
583
0
2,624
263
204
2,332
583
17,897
TMB
96,519
35,544
3,323
0
2,312
1,011
144
867
867
4,046
FAI
54,336
2,296
412
0
0
117
0
0
0
1,413
Tables II-3 and II-4 demonstrate that the overwhelming majority of
GA operations are performed by single and twin engine piston aircraft.
Table II-5 lists HP and baseline emissions in pounds per LTD for eight
piston engines. Table II-5 is derived from baseline emission factors
28 29 30
supplied by the respective engine manufacturers. ' '
-------
Table II-5
Baseline Engine Emission Factors In
Man.
TCM+
LYC*
LYC
LYC
TCM
TCM
TCM
TCM
4.
TCM
Pounds per LTO
Engine Mod.
TSIO-360-C
IO-320-D
IO-360-B
0-320-D
0-200-A
IO-520-D
Tiara G-285-B
GTSIO-520-K
for Selected Piston Engines
HP
225
160
180
160
100
300
285
435
HC
1.0575
0.192
0.288
0.255
0.22
0.66
0.399
0.609
CO
21.825
10.56
12.24
16.00
8.9
23.7
21.66
37 . 845
NOx
1.0315
0.0288
0.0504
0.0624
0.05
0.072
0.1197
0.0957
= Teledyne Continental Motors
*LYC = Avco Lycoming
The LTO is that currently specified in the Federal Register at 38
FR 19101 for PI class engines.
To further break down the single and twin engine piston aircraft,
the percentage distribution of GA aircraft by manufacturer and model
utilizing each selected GA airport is assumed to coincide with the over-
all distribution nationwide. Table 25 of the 1973 U.S. Census of Civil
13
Aircraft lists the active GA piston aircraft by manufacturer and number.
The corresponding engine manufacturer, horsepower and number of engines
is listed. Only those single engine models with more than 1000 active
aircraft and twin engine models with more than 100 active aircraft are
included in the study to reduce the complexity of the analysis. Such
single engine models comprise 84% of the total single engine active
national population and 90% of the total twin engine active national
population.
-------
For those aircraft that do not utilize any of the engines listed in
Table II-5, an engine of similar horsepower is selected from Table II-5
and assumed. Thus, a nationwide percentage distribution of the eight
engines for single engine aircraft and for twin engine aircraft is
obtained and listed in Tables II-6 and II-7. The Pratt and Whitney
radial engine used on the DC-3 is assumed to be equivalent to 3 GTS 10-
520-K engines.
Table II-6
National Engine Diatribution:
Single Piston Engine Aircraft
Man. Engine Mod. Number of Engines % of Total
TCM TSIO-360-C 2,918 2.9
LYC IO-320-D 7,219 7.1
LYC IO-360-B 19,257 19.0
LYC 0-320-D 7,944 7.9
TCM 0-200-A 37,146 36.7
TCM IO-520-D 4,910 4.9
TCM Tiara G-285-B 18,376 18.2
TCM GTSIO-520-K 3,342 3.3
Table II-7
National Engine Distribution;
Twin Piston Engine Aircraft
Man. Engine Mod. Number of Engines % of Total
TCM TSIO-360-C 1,790 6.1
LYC IO-360-B 1,510 5.2
LYC 0-320-D 7,876 27.0
TCM IO-520-D 11,962 41.0
TCM GTSIO-520-K 6,050 20.7
-------
The percentages in Tables II-6 and II-7 are applied to the single
and twin piston engine numbers of LTOs from Table II-4 taking care to
multiply by two for the twin engine LTOs. The resulting numbers of LTOs
per engine per selected airport per year are multiplied by the respective
pollutant emissions per LTO from Table II-5, summed and divided by 2000
to obtain Table II-8 and Table 5 above in the discussion section for the
selected GA airports. The percentages of total LTOs are the sum of the
single and twin engine piston percentages for GA multiplied by the
percent GA and local from Table 11-2. Note that Phoenix includes the
piston engine AT (Cessna 402) and that Fairbanks includes all AT as
twin engine piston with the same engine distribution assumed as the GA
twin engine piston.
Table II-8
CY1974 Summary of Total Emissions from
GA Aircraft at Selected Airports in T/Yr
Airport % of Total LTOs HC CO NOx
Van Nuys (VNY) 91.6 56 2488 10
Tamiami (TMB) 91.0 35 1551 6
Phoenix (PHX)* 71,0 33 1448 6
Fairbanks (FAI) 86.4 14 631 3
San Jose Municipal(SJC)} 89>4 ^ ^ 2
San Jose Reid HV (RHV)
*Includes piston engine AT
Includes all AT as twin piston engine
The current trend toward twin engine piston, twin engine turboprop
and twin engine turbojet for business and executive flying is expected
to continue. Single engine piston will continue to predominate for
pleasure flying. With the exception of rotorcraft all the GA categories
-------
except single and twin engine piston were negligible in CY1974 (see
Tables II-3 and II-4). Rotorcraft are not included in this study.
Therefore, for purposes of estimating pollutant emissions in 1980 the
calculations are based largely upon single and twin engine piston opera-
tions. The engine distributions within the single and twin engine
categories are assumed unchanged. Baseline emissions are assumed to
present a worst case situation.
Table II-9 for FY1980 and Table 11-10 for FY1985 are derived by
a
interpolation from the Terminal Area Forecast for 1976-1986. Military
operations are assumed to remain constant in accordance with the FAA
assumption for the Terminal Area Forecast. Based on the trends toward
single and twin engine aircraft noted above, the percentages of active
GA aircraft at each selected airport as assumed are listed in Tables II-
11 and 11-12 respectively for FY1980 and FY1985. Applying these per-
centages to Tables II-9 and 11-10 and dividing by two, the predicted
LTOs in Tables 11-13 and 11-14 are obtained. Note as above that Phoenix
includes piston engine AT and that Fairbanks includes all AT as twin
engine piston.
-------
Table II-9
FY1980 Predicted Operations for Selected
Operations
Total
Military
GA & Local
AT
AC
Operations
Total
Military
GA & Local
AT
AC
SJC&RHV
951,000
1,462
(0.15%)
878,538
(92.4%)
10,000
91.1%)
61,000
(6.4%)
GA Airports
PHX
544,000
10,064
(2%)
418,936
(77%)
10,000
(2%)
105,000
(19%)
Table 11-10
FY1985 Predicted Operations
SJC&RHV
1,068,000
1,462
(0.1%)
983,538
(92.1%)
14,000
(1.3%)
69,000
(6.5%)
GA Airports
PHX
611,000
10,064
(2%)
469,936
(77%)
14,000
(2%)
117,000
(19%)
VNY
783,000
3,637
(0.5%)
778,363
(99.4%)
1,000
(0.1%)
0
TMB
446,000
1,168
(0.3%)
444,832
(99.7%)
0
0
FAI
242,000
2,051
(0,8%)
189,949
(78.5%)
33,000
(13.6%)
17,000
(7.0%)
for Selected
VNY
879,000
3,637
(0.4%)
874,363
(99.5%)
1,000
(0.1%)
0
TMB
634,000
1,168
(0.2%)
632,832
(99.8%)
0
0
FAI
304,000
2,051
(0.7%)
241,949
(79.6%)
37,000
(12.2%)
23,000
(7.6%)
-------
Table 11-11
FY1980 Predicted Percent Active GA Aircraft
Engine
Number
Single
Twin
Twin
Twin
Rotorcraft
by Engine
Type
Piston
Piston
Turboprop
Turbojet
Type and Number for Selected GA Airpc
SJC&RHV
88
9
0.5
0.5
2
PHX
80
12.5
1
0.5
6
VNY
80.5
11
1
1
6.5
TMB
68
25
2
2
3
FAI
93
4
0
0
3
Table 11-12
FY1985 Predicted Percent Active GA Aircraft
by Engine
Engine
Number Type
Single Piston
Twin Piston
Twin Turboprop
Twin Turbojet
Rotorcraft
Type and Number for Selected GA Airpc
SJC&RHV
88
9
0.5
0.5
2
PHX
80
12.5
1
0.5
6
VNY
80.5
11
1
1
6.5
TMB
68
25
2
2
3
FAI
93
4
0
0
3
-------
Table 11-13
FY1980 Predicted Number of GA Aircraft LTOs
by Engine Type and Number for Selected GA Airports
Engine
Number
Single
Twin
Twin
Twin
Type
Piston
Piston
Turboprop
Turbojet
Rotorcraft
FY1985
SJC&RHV PHX
386,557 167,574
39,534 26,184
2,196 2,095
2,196 1,047
8,785 12,568
Table 11-14
Predicted Number of GA
VNY
313,291
42,810
3,892
3,892
25,296
Aircraft
TMB
151,243
55,604
4,448
4,448
6,672
LTOs
FAI
88,326
3,799
0
0
2,849
by Engine Type and Number for Selected GA Airports
Engine
Number
Single
Twin
Twin
Twin
Rotorcraft
Type
Piston
Piston
Turboprop
Turbojet
SJC&RHV PHX
432,757 187,974
44,259 29,371
2,459 2,350
2,459 1,175
9,835 14,098
VNY
351,931
48.090
4,372
4,372
28,417
TMB
215,163
79,104
6,328
6,328
9,492
FAI
112,506
4,839
0
0
3,629
As above, the percentages in Tables II-6 and II-7 are applied to
the numbers of LTOs in Tables 11-13 and 11-14, multiplied by the respective
pollutant emissions per LTO from Table H-5, summed and divided by 2000
to obtain Tables 6 and 7 in the discussion section of this study above.
-------
References
1. An Air Pollution Impact Methodology for Airports - Phase I,
January 1973; United States Environmental Protection Agency.
2. Airport Emission Inventory Methodology - Final Report; December
1974; GCA/Technology Division
3. The Impact of Aircraft Emissions Upon Ambient Air Quality - 1972;
Northern Research and Engineering Corporation
4. Aircraft Emissions: Impact on Air Quality and Feasibility of
Control - Undated; United States Environmental Protection Agency
5. Jet Aircraft Emissions and Air Quality in the Vicinity of the
Los Angeles International Airport - April 1971; Air Pollution
Control District, County of Los Angeles
6. Measurements of Air Pollutant Concentrations at O'Hare International
Airport, Chicago and Orange County Airport, California - March
1972; Celesco Industries
7. Airport Vicinity Air Pollution Study - Final Report; December 1973;
United States Department of Transportation
8. Terminal Area Forecast 1976-1986 - September 1974; United States
Department of Transportation
9. Airport Activity Statistics of Certified Route Air Carriers
for 1972; United States Department of Transportation
10. Official Airline Guide, North American Edition, August 1, 1975;
Reuben H. Donnelly Corporation
11. FAA - Air Traffic Activity - 1972; United States Department of
Transportation
12. Equipment Forecast for top 25 Air Carrier Airports 1975 - 2000;
United States Department of Transportation.
13. Census of U.S. Civil Aircraft - Calendar Year 1973; United States
Department of Transportation
14. Traffic Flow - December 1972; International Civil Aviation
Organization
15. Non-Scheduled Air Transport - 1972; International Civil Aviation
Organization, Publication #184
16. Fleet Mix Publication; The National Air Carrier Association,
Washington, D.C.
-------
-2-
17. General Aviation Activity Survey - 1972; Department of Transportation
18. Conversation with Tom Connel, Chief Dispatcher, Butler Aviation,
O'Hare International Airport, July 31, 1975
19. Conversation with Joe Windisch of the New York Port Authority, May
27, 1976
20. Unpublished report from TWA, Eastern, American and United Airlines
to Charles Gray, EPA on taxi-idle times at LAX, JFK, ORD, and DCA,
July, 1971 (officially directed to Northern Research).
21. O'Hare Airport Emission Inventory, Argonne National Labs for FAA,
Lawrence Wangen, July, 1973
22. Airport Activity Statistics of Certified Route Air Carriers for
1973; United States Department of Transportation
23. Official Airline Guide, International Edition - July 1975; Reuben
H. Donnelly Corporation
24. Jane's All The World Aircraft - 1972
25. DMS Air World Survey, Supplement to Volume 27, No. 4, 1975
26. Communication from Bernard Hannan of the Federal Aviation Administration
27. FAA - Air Traffic Activity - 1974; United States Department of
Transportation
28. Exhaust Emissions Survey of a Piston Aircraft Engine - AVCO-
Lycoming Division; Undated
29. Teledyne Continental Motors - Written Communication at EPA meeting
July 22, 1976
30. AVCO - Lycoming Division - Monthly Report, February 1976
------- |